Well, I guess I am showing a bias towards the behaviour of GLUT and "freeglut" under Windows because that is what I am most used to.  Also, if we make the window position that of the decorations, we will have to change both "glutGet" in Linux and everything (both the create and the "glutGet" behaviour) in Windows.  But I can certainly live with doing this.

John F. Fay

"It is a poverty to decide that an unborn child must die in order that you may live as you like."  - Mother Teresa

-----Original Message-----
From: hunchback@netcabo.pt [mailto:hunchback@netcabo.pt]
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 2:55 PM
To: freeglut-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: RE: [Freeglut-developer] Window Positions

>There is a bright spot here, or at least I think there is.  In "glutGet"
>the call to "XGetWindowAttributes" returns, among other things, the
>offset from the corner of the window to the corner of the drawable area.
>So we shouldn't have to save two additional variables and we shouldn't
>have to fix our offsets at (6,20).  In theory at least, we should be
>able to subtract the "winAttributes.x" and "winAttributes.y" from the
>present "x" and "y" values and return to the user the position of the
>decoration.  This is my option (b) from yesterday, the one I do not
>prefer but which would be acceptable.

Why don't you like this option? From the users perspective i think it makes
sense.. An option to create a window with the drawable area on the exact
point you call the function would be adding a function (or adding flags to
the function) to create a window without decorations. I think something
like this is more important than some options that are on the page, like a window
closing  confirmation box.

Nuno Afonso

This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open!
Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and
the chance of winning an Apple iPod:
Freeglut-developer mailing list