[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: x-display-pixel-width/height inconsistency

From: Jan D.
Subject: Re: x-display-pixel-width/height inconsistency
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 19:16:25 +0200


28 apr 2013 kl. 03:40 skrev YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <address@hidden>:

>>>>>> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:04:46 +0200, Jan Djärv <address@hidden> said:
>> A general objection is that XRandr/Xinerama is not used, so
>> the non-Gtk+ code relies on a freedesktop compliant window manager,
>> rather than taking the general approach.  If XRandr/Xinerama is
>> used, no split between Gtk+ and non-Gtk+ code is needed.
>> Xrandr/Xinerama is what Gtk+ use anyway so we are not adding any new
>> dependencies.
> Of course, patches welcome.  (And also for implementations for other
> platforms.)  I guess XRandR 1.2 covers most of the current uses.

Patch attached. The patch includes your code.
Actually 1.3 is better, it has XRRGetOutputPrimary.  Without it we have to 

> Because XRandR or Xinerama doesn't help us get information about the
> workarea (that's the task of window managers), we need some function
> like x_get_net_workarea regardless of the use of XRandR or Xinerama.


> Even with XRandR or Xinerama code, leaving the GDK code would be
> meaningful because we may have yet another framework for multiple
> monitor support (GDK already covers 3 of them on X11) in future.

Gdk covers the "Xinerama on Solaris" case which is a bit different.  I don't 
have any Solaris available, so I can't do that.

Another comment:
Your defun is x-display-monitor-attributes-list.  Aren't we supposed to try to 
avoid the use of x-prefixed functions?  display-monitor-attributes-list sounds 
fine to me.

        Jan D.

Attachment: randr.diff
Description: Binary data

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]