[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: What improvements would be truly useful?

From: Alan Third
Subject: Re: What improvements would be truly useful?
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 16:24:33 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.9.3 (2018-01-21)

On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 03:20:58PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Philipp Stephani <address@hidden>
> > Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2018 21:45:46 +0000
> > Cc: Daniele Nicolodi <address@hidden>, address@hidden
> >
> > By adding a gtkterm.c, that does the same as w32term.c, just for GTK, 
> > without referring to X.org in any way?
> > The cleanup would then consist in removing all GTK functionality from 
> > xterm.c once gtkterm.c is stable.
> (I guess you meant removing GTK-related portions of xfns.c as well?)
> If you look at these two files, you will see that the GTK-specific
> snippets in them are a few and far between.  Most of the code is
> generic.

That’s part of the problem with how Emacs deals with GTK, it does many
things the X way rather than the GTK way.

For example, mouse and keyboard events are dealt with using X code,
but GTK provides it’s own APIs for dealing with them. I thought
implementing touch events would be easy because GTK already does all
the heavy lifting, but Emacs doesn’t use GTK for events.

I strongly suspect a Wayland compatible GTK Emacs would have to remove
a lot of (all?) X code and replace it with GTK code.

> My understanding of this sub-thread was that the idea was to separate
> GTK _architecturally_, not just making it yet another display
> back-end.

I don’t think I understand the difference.
Alan Third

reply via email to

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