On 07/16/2014 03:23 PM, David Seikel wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:56:23 -0400 Chris Michael
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hello devs :)
>>
>> There was a brief discussion on IRC today regarding using libinput
>> (of wayland fame) for other input related things in EFL (aside from
>> drm). Cedric mentioned that it could be used for fb and various other
>> engines/platforms. This would allow us to unify handling input
>> devices under one efl library.
>>
>> Ecore_Input seems the likely candidate to me....So I am writing to
>> get any additional comments/remarks (before going through the effort
>> of changing things).
>>
>> One thing that I have noticed in the current ecore_input code is the
>> namespacing seems wrong. The actual ecore_input codebase uses
>> ecore_event as the API namespace (ecore_event_init, etc, etc). This
>> just seems sooo wrong to me :( One thing I would like to do (open for
>> discussion), is to unify this into ecore_input_init, etc, etc to make
>> the API functions match the library namespace...However this would
>> mean depcreating the existing ecore_event_init APIs (yes, mark them
>> as deprecated, but internally just make the code call the newer
>> ecore_input_init, etc).
>>
>> Another thing we could do here is to bring in udev dependency and do
>> input device discovery :) This would unify things so that we don't
>> duplicate code (ecore_drm does this, ecore_fb could benefit from it,
>> etc, etc).
>>
>> Yet a third thing Could be to (compile time optional) bring in the
>> systemd deps from ecore_drm and have ecore_input handle opening
>> /dev/input devices and feeding those events. This would also unify
>> and reduce code duplication.
>>
>> Please bear in mind this is an RFC so nothing is concrete yet. I am
>> just trying to gather ideas/thoughts/concerns/comments, etc, etc
>> Before I get started on the work.
>>
>> Flame On !
>
> Well, you asked for flames ....  B-)
>
> systemd should definitely be kept optional.  It's controversial enough
> that a lot of Linux distros are unlikely to use it, including at least
> one of the ones I'm thinking of moving to.

Well, Not to fan flames, but I only know of One distro that is not 
moving to it (due to their own upstart init system) ... but I have heard 
that even That distro is looking into supporting it in upcoming releases...

But please, this is not a "distro war" or "init system" thread...

   I'm also considering moving
> to Wayland, but not if I have to use systemd to be able to actually
> input stuff.
>
> One thing that REALLY annoyed me about the current keyboard stuff is
> the horrid way strings are used to send the keystrokes.  Strdup'ed from
> an internal array, and we have to have our own separate copies of these
> strings to do slow strcmp's with.  Seriously?  Can we at least strshare
> them internally?  Expose the internal array?
>

Which current keyboard stuff are you referring to ??

> It's 5AM, I need sleep.
>
> Yes to combining stuff, no to introducing more deps, yes to cleaning
> up the API.  Though if it's shown that an embedded ecore_fb single
> application thingy can be made smaller using libinput, then that's good.
>
>

Well, the only "certain" dep which would need to be added would be udev 
for device discovery. The systemd portions of the code could be #ifdef'd.

Well, it would be smaller in the terms that ecore_fb would not have to 
deal with handling input code itself anymore. It currently has it's own 
code for input events, etc, etc (as does ecore_drm). Those could be 
unified and end up using ecore_input.

dh


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck
Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code
search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel

Reply via email to