[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PGTK-related misconceptions
From: |
Trey Peacock |
Subject: |
Re: PGTK-related misconceptions |
Date: |
Wed, 20 Apr 2022 02:33:14 +0000 |
"Po Lu" <luangruo@yahoo.com> writes:
> Trey Peacock <gpg@treypeacock.com> writes:
>
>> It does not seem to be a requirement of GTK 3.2 or XKB to send virtual
>> modifiers.
>
> See https://docs.gtk.org/gdk3/flags.ModifierType.html, which says:
>
> Since 2.10, GDK recognizes which of the Meta, Super or Hyper keys are
> mapped to Mod2 - Mod5, and indicates this by setting GDK_SUPER_MASK,
> GDK_HYPER_MASK or GDK_META_MASK in the state field of key events.
The capability to do something is not the same as a requirement.
>> The only compositor I have come across that actually sends a virtual
>> modifier is mutter/GNOME. Neither wlroots nor Weston, the Wayland
>> reference implementation, send them. I'm unsure about Plasma, but I
>> believe this highlights an issue with the development of pgtk, if it
>> is meant to be targeted towards wayland users it should be tested
>> against more than just one compositor.
>
> I don't have any other compositor installed that I can actually start.
> Users, such as you, are supposed to do that part of the job.
I would be happy to help. Granted, this is only my second interaction on
the mailing list, but I do want to contribute how I can.
>> The experience of a user updating Emacs and realizing a key is no longer
>> recognized, without any notification or justification would also be a
>> step backwards.
>
> That is the price you pay when using the development version of Emacs.
> The key wasn't intentionally disabled, so I cannot know those problems
> exist until users like you report them.
>
> Hopefully, those problems will no longer exist when Emacs 29.1 is
> released.
100% agree about the risks and responsibilities of users of dev
versions. That's why I wanted to bring this to attention.
>> I have spoken with devs of wlroots & wayland over IRC and they seem to
>> agree that it is not necessary. I don't mean to be adversarial but would
>> be happy to see this change amended to incorporate the entirety of
>> wayland compositors.
>
> Wayland compositors do not send those virtual modifier masks. GDK is
> supposed to, and does it correctly when running on GNOME Shell, so the
> bug either lies in GTK or the other Wayland compositors.
The reason this works is because mutter sends additional virtual
modifiers. You can see more here:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/commit/0fa9751b3144aef5faaca1ad381b6f86b5f30994.
It is not GDK that is responsible for this. Further, since this is not
required, I don't think its proper to deem it a bug.
Now, if we were building this against Gtk 4 then I would agree with you
it seems to be the direction it's going. Though still not fully
explicit.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/blob/main/docs/reference/gtk/migrating-3to4.md#adapt-to-changes-in-keyboard-modifier-handling.
Your change seems to have removed a fallback in case there were no
virtual modifiers and reverses the previous logic:
previously: if a virtual modifier exists equal to GDK_SUPER_MASK then
super_mod_mask = GDK_MOD4_MASK, if it does not equal GDK_SUPER_MASK then
it just passes the state & current value. Lastly, if a virtual modifier
does not exist super_mod_mask=GDK_MOD4_MASK.
current: only if a virtual modifier exists does super_mod_mask =
GDK_SUPER_MASK.
x_find_modifier_meanings (struct pgtk_display_info *dpyinfo)
{...
- state = GDK_SUPER_MASK;
- r = gdk_keymap_map_virtual_modifiers (keymap, &state);
- if (r)
- {
- /* Super key exists. */
- if (state == GDK_SUPER_MASK)
- {
- dpyinfo->super_mod_mask = GDK_MOD4_MASK; /* maybe this is super.
*/
- }
- else
- {
- dpyinfo->super_mod_mask = state & ~GDK_SUPER_MASK;
- }
- }
- else
- {
- dpyinfo->super_mod_mask = GDK_MOD4_MASK;
- }
...
}
...
pgtk_gtk_to_emacs_modifiers (struct pgtk_display_info *dpyinfo, int state)
{...
- if (state & dpyinfo->super_mod_mask)
+ if (state & GDK_SUPER_MASK)
mod |= mod_super;
...
}
publickey - gpg@treypeacock.com - da008078.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: PGTK-related misconceptions, Trey, 2022/04/18
- Re: PGTK-related misconceptions, Po Lu, 2022/04/18
- Re: PGTK-related misconceptions, Trey Peacock, 2022/04/18
- Re: PGTK-related misconceptions, Po Lu, 2022/04/19
- Re: PGTK-related misconceptions, Trey Peacock, 2022/04/19
- Re: PGTK-related misconceptions, Po Lu, 2022/04/19
- Re: PGTK-related misconceptions,
Trey Peacock <=
- Re: PGTK-related misconceptions, Po Lu, 2022/04/20
Re: PGTK-related misconceptions, Trey Peacock, 2022/04/20