|
From: <tim...@en...> - 2007-03-09 09:37:43
|
> On Thursday 08 March 2007 04:53, Timothée Lecomte wrote: > >> >>> What I implement in the plugin1.diff and plugin2.diff is the an >>> in-between >>> interactive structure: >>> term->inter->waitforinput >>> term->inter->put_tmptext >>> term->inter->set_ruler >>> term->inter->set_cursor >>> term->inter->set_clipboard >>> >>> so that non-interactive terminals just have term->inter = 0, making it >>> easier to extend the terminal API for interactive commands. >> >> Yes, that's a bit cleaner. >> But it's not like we extend the terminal API every week. > > So you would suggest that I add term->raise_term_window directly in > struct termentry ? > > In that case, my point is that: > - if I add it to the bottom, then it's one more #ifdef USE_MOUSE > - if I add it inside the current #ifdef USE_MOUSE, I have to add one '0' > manually to all drivers Well, let's forget this idea of term->inter->... I can actually add term->raise_term_window just inside the existing #ifdef USE_MOUSE ... #endif, and I can introduce the following: #define EMPTY_MOUSE_ENTRIES \ #ifdef USE_MOUSE \ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, \ #endif So that non-mouseable terminals will just use NO_MOUSE_ENTRIES, and it will be much easier to add new mousing commands in the future. Does that sound right ? Best regards, Timothée |