| Re: [AD] proposal: remove XLOCK/XUNLOCK |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
- To: alleg-developers@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [AD] proposal: remove XLOCK/XUNLOCK
- From: Chris <chris.kcat@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:05:20 -0700
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=g9i7PJlpz3/mkRuQTnvCL4xwfc7a42ZOuxkQoftXQaxsi64EpH0L06L6qVw1i+/MU4M8TJnb7OLdf4b/6pK71Ip1RfHpJ5PyFbUHvUJwzT/WqEIyAgaqylUuvsC3UyTM0Ifp4rhSd3Hdab546mXZ/emAi1NoiFuDLgXgoDXusp0=
On Sunday 23 April 2006 09:19, Elias Pschernig wrote:
> But the problem just is, XLOCK/XUNLOCK is inherently error prone, and
> since as you found out, x.org already calls XLockDisplay/XUnlockDisplay
> where it needs it, is not needed at all.
However, just like with bitmap/screen locking, it'd be useful to do it
manually just once for a group of commands instead of letting each command
lock itself. Plus, can we gaurantee X will always lock for us? Is it in any
official documentation? Can we assume it'll always be this way even for other
implementations (eg. XGL or AIGLX)?