Re: [MiNT] WM_REPOSED implementation

[Evan Langlois <Evan@CoolRunningConcepts.com>]

On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 21:27 +0100, olivier.landemarre@utbm.fr wrote:

> Notice a lot of software could not need a specific message if they don't think
> that only 2 coordinate could be change on WM_MOVED or WM_RESIZED, unfortunatly,

Its more work to ignore the information the AES gives you.  Who would do
something so stupid?

> it's not the case, and actually all AES do a WM_MOVED and WM_RESIZED to solve

You're telling me its common that software is that bad?  And we're going
to make it more difficult for new application designers by giving them
yet more complexity to deal with and having to decide what level of the
AES they wish to support, etc, etc.

> this problem, some time this is not very beautifull on to see on screen, it's
> why I agree to support new message for this, if software wan't it, for other we
> continue to send 2 messages.

Well, the visual problems would be solved had the update been done after
a delay to get the next message.  However, that doesn't help existing
apps.

How about instead of a new message, you just tell the AES "Hey, I'm not
stupid, don't send me an extra WM_MOVED with your WM_SIZED messages".
Now, the AES doesn't have to interpret that because new apps should
respect that WM_SIZED and WM_MOVED send all 4 coordinates!  Your
application would have compatibility with all AES versions without
having to handle yet another message.

You could even go one step further - and if the application calls
wind_set immediately after getting the WM_SIZED and has changed the WH
coordinates and is reporting the old XY coordinates, then send another
WM_MOVED message in response.  Now you don't have to tell the AES you're
written properly, it will figure it out.  This obviously won't prevent
the visual problems for broken apps, but it won't hurt properly written
apps that don't handle a new message.