Re: [MiNT] WM_REPOSED implementation

[Evan Langlois <Evan@CoolRunningConcepts.com>]

On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 12:29 +0100, Odd Skancke wrote:

>  Ofcourse, you could use WM_SIZED as a WM_REPOSED, if thats what you
> mean, but this would lead to extra code in each application to check if
> only a size or both a move/size happened .. and for what? One extra
> messgage definition in your compiler header file?

resizing a window should send WM_SIZED.  Not REPOSED.  Just because a
resize changes the X/Y coordinates does not mean a new message should be
invented.   If you feel there is some reason to care if your window has
moved then you are micro-managing things that you really should not care
about at all.  And checking the XY should you really care is NOT that
much work.  Adding new messages that duplicate whats been working fine
for 20 years is just silly.

>  This is the last time I comment on this, because its not gonna change
> in XaAES anyways.

I can see you're intent on continuing to make an even bigger mess of the
API.  I'm done.

Bye all!