[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
On Friday 02 July 2004 18:50, Elias Pschernig wrote:
> No functions of the public API nor any structs were modified, so it is
> also ABI compatible. I think you can just apply it to branch as well. Or
> am I missing something?
It adds the global symbol _al_sane_strncpy... I'm not sure this doesn't
cause problems with the Allegro DLL in Windows which, if I remember
correctly, uses index numbers rather than symbol names.
I guess there's nothing for it but to see if it will properly run
programs...
The X windows patch should be ok though.
>
> > What about the third patch on the tracker? The description is
[...]
>
> Well, Eric said this:
>
> > > http://www.allegro.cc/forums/view_thread.php?_id=354745&;
> >
> > I suppose this is patch #943753 on SF's tracker. I've attached it.
> >
> > Peter, do you have an opinion on the patch? I remember that you >
didn't like
> > a patch that would have made the same change (read all events) to the >
Xlib
> > event loop.
>
> So I guess, nobody really knows how bad it is.
OK...
> > while (read(joy_fd[i], &e, sizeof(struct js_event)) == sizeof(struct
js_event))
>
> The above means, if the joystick sends too much data - it will just hang
> the Allegro program.
Not really nice IMO... then again, the joystick isn't updated
asynchronously anyway, so this would only affect the program when
poll_joystick() is called, which could be a blocking call I guess...
> OTOH, if the program is too slow to receive all
> joystick input - there's a problem anyway.
Maybe it would be better to let the user know if there are unread events
and let them decide...?
> I don't have a joystick
> myself to test it, and at least someone finds the new behavior better -
> so I'd vote for applying it, and then see if linux programs start
> behaving bad with joystick enabled.
I have a gamepad. I'll see if I can check it out later tonight - I never
had any problems with the current behavior though...
Evert