| Re: [AD] Keyconf problem? |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
Elias Pschernig wrote:
On Sat, 2005-03-12 at 03:23 +1100, Peter Wang wrote:
In case you didn't see it, I emulated the OS repeat settings in the
new_api_branch.
I did see you have key repeat handling there, but I thought it was
because you removed Allegro's keyboard repeating from the core.. so
didn't look closer. Seems you still need to create a timer though..?
Yes. That's how the emulation is done.
+ {
+ /* Additional characters are dropped, since I'm not sure when exactly this occurs. */
+ unicode = chars[0];
+ }
+ else
+ unicode = 0;
+ }
Yes. But it doesn't seem to emit any dead keys. I'll try and let it
print out the extra keys if n > 1. But if 2 or more keys are stored,
wouldn't it be better in any case to read at least the first, than
ignoring completely with n==1?
Probably.
Otherwise, personally, I think it still is an advantage over the current
driver, even if in theory the pckeys.c driver can handle dead keys. Do
you know if e.g. SDL can report back dead keys?
Didn't check.
Hm, and do you have any opinion about a non-DirectInput driver? If we're
lucky, it would be quite simple to just call allegro's handle_keypress
whenever a MSG_KEY (or whatever it is) is received in the windows events
loop. To me that seems to have only advantages.
A quick search for "WM_CHAR DirectInput" on Google suggests that you're
right. We might need DirectInput for positional mapping, but I think
we're dropping that idea (?)
Peter