Miciah Dashiel Butler Masters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 02:21:25AM +0300, Kalle Olavi Niemitalo wrote: >> - return (kbd->key < 0) ? -1 : 0; >> + return (kbd->key == KBD_UNDEF) ? -1 : 0;
>> - if (kbd->key < 0) return;
>> + if (kbd->key == KBD_UNDEF) return;
> Maybe this should be a separate patch.
They are related; negative values were previously not used.
It could be separated though.
>> - /* The event might have been changed to a mouse event */
>> - if (ev->ev == EVENT_KBD && kbd.key != KBD_UNDEF) {
>> - copy_struct(&ev->info.keyboard, &kbd);
>> - }
>> + /* KBD_UNDEF here means it was unrecognized or a mouse event. */
>> + if (kbd.key != KBD_UNDEF)
>> + set_kbd_interlink_event(ev, kbd.key, kbd.modifier);
> This should be in a separate patch.
I changed the test because now that the function uses
set_kbd_interlink_event, it no longer needs to rely on the
previous value of ev->ev.
It could be separated though.
>> + /* Values <= 0x100 are special; e.g. KBD_ENTER.
>
> Shouldn't that be -0x100?
Yes, it should.
>> +#define is_kbd_fkey(key) ((unsigned long) (KBD_F1 - (key)) <= (unsigned
>> long) (KBD_F1 - KBD_F12))
> [...]
>
> Does it need to be this cryptic? How about just:
>
> #define is_kbd_fkey(key) ((key) <= KBD_F1 && (key) >= KBD_F12)
Because the name of the macro is in lower case, I wanted to make
sure it does not have more side effects than a function would.
If you think it is too cryptic, then how about an inline function?
I probably won't be able to post revised patches today.
pgp6KoAHDVkIp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ elinks-dev mailing list [email protected] http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/elinks-dev
