[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH] Renaming non-X x_* identifiers

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Renaming non-X x_* identifiers
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 19:10:59 +0300

> From: Alex Gramiak <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 09:57:47 -0600
> > I generally dislike system-dependent definitions and declarations.  I
> > prefer them to be available on all systems, with some default values
> > instead.  And terminal-only builds are extremely rare (I think only
> > Hydra does them regularly, because all the bugs in that area are
> > flagged by Hydra), so this defense is quite weak, IME.
> The hooks I'm referring to are ones that AFAIU don't make any sense on
> non-HAVE_WINDOW_SYSTEM, and their calls are (should be) already #ifdef'd
> out (with non-window-system frames never reaching the call). Including
> the #ifdefs in the declaration side would allow for Hydra to detect
> cases where an undefined hook is called, which would mean adding the
> appropriate #ifdef or an appropriate check around that call.

Can you show the list of those hooks you want to #ifdef?  Maybe I'm
misinterpreting your suggestion.

> I'm a bit confused by your comment on testing. Didn't you say that it
> was okay that the code that was under HAVE_WINDOW_SYSTEM didn't test for
> existence of required HAVE_WINDOW_SYSTEM hooks? Those hooks are the ones
> I was thinking about wrapping into #ifdefs.

Ah, I see the misunderstanding.  Yes, it would be okay to #ifdef the
calls to those which are only available on window-systems, but then
why would we test the other kind of hooks for being non-NULL?

I thought those which don't need to be tested are available on both
GUI and TTY frames.

reply via email to

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