Hi, On 8 October 2015 at 08:27, Jonas Ådahl <jad...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 12:04:49PM -0500, Derek Foreman wrote: >> There are cases in weston where it would be quite nice to have a >> sentinel value to use instead of having to have a bool for "this serial >> number is legit" too. > > Even though probably unlikely, for clients unaware of a possible 0 == no > serial, this would mean that they would suddenly start to be killed when > when they before worked just fine. > >> >> > In cases where we have two behaviors for serial-aware and >> > non-serial-aware operations, I would rather have two different client >> > requests. > > This would be my preference as well. Partly because the semantics of a > request with a serial and one without will probably behave differently, > and partly because the existing places where you pass a serial has > mentioning of any "non-serial" or "invalid serial" situations and we'd > now just add a bunch of undefined behaviour. > > Is it really a big deal to have to multiple requests that do things > differently?
Let's try to solve this empirically, then - which optional-serial requests do we have apart from present/needs-attention here, and what does/would the difference look like semantically? Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
