Richard has put a comment into "freeglut_internal.h" to the effect that
callback enumerations should start with "WCB_" instead of the present "CB_".
I have nothing against this change but wonder why this wasn't done in the
first place. Anybody know?
John F. Fay
From: Richard Rauch <sforge@ol...> - 2003-11-25 00:16:58
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 03:04:53PM -0600, Fay John F Contr AAC/WMG wrote:
> Richard has put a comment into "freeglut_internal.h" to the effect that
> callback enumerations should start with "WCB_" instead of the present "CB_".
> I have nothing against this change but wonder why this wasn't done in the
> first place. Anybody know?
My guess is that it didn't seem to stand out as much before. When I
converted callbacks to use arrays, I wrote the FETCH_* and INVOKE_*
macros. Originally, I called the macros FETCH() and INVOKE() (or
FETCHCB() and INVOKECB()?), but realized that that would be a long-
range error if the other callbacks were moved into arrays. So I wanted
to say what was being fetched (callbacks) and what *kind* of callbacks.
So the WCB stuff was introduced.
Now with the macros hanging around, the plain _CB suffix stands out a
little more (if you're standing in the right spot).
Of course, I'm just guessing, here, since the code predates any con-
tact that I've had with freeglut. But it really didn't (IMHO) stand
out so much previous to introducing the callback array.
"I probably don't know what I'm talking about." http://www.olib.org/~rkr/
Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.