Hi Dominik, > ... and possibly people connected to the X server by a phone line. > What I'm worried about is the latency by grabbing or ungrabbing > bindings over a slow connection.
I assume you're talking about grabbing the X server whenever a new window is created to GrabWindowKey() for each applicable binding? Well the latency is increased by 3 matchWildcards() calls for each window-specific binding. (global bindings have negligible overhead.) Not much for an irregular event such as the creation of a toplevel window. > Some applications change their > name very often (e.g. some clocks). Yes. How does this relate to my patch? The binding list is searched when a key/mouse event occurs - not when the window class/resource/name changes. And this doesn't require an X server grab. > By the way, how does the patch handle PointerKey bindings? The CheckTwoBindings() call tries to match bindings on the window with the focus & the window that the pointer is in. My patch just extends the check to include the resource/class/name of both windows. > > > - I'd rather see the four name strings put into a structure (to > > > reduce the number arguments passed to the functions). I think I'll pass an XClassHint* to reduce the number of additional parameters to 2. Creating a new struct to hold resource/class/name will create lots more code & get a bit messy. SCoTT. :) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
