Re: Proposed change to Pipmak's grabbing

[Aidan G. <wgs...@no...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Christian Walther wrote:
> I have tried this patch, and it appears to work as intended. However, I 
> dislike the intention, because I think it decreases usability.
> 
> My main objection is that it makes the user aware of the grabbing and 
> requires him to think about it and understand the concept. The grabbing 
> should be an implementation detail, something that happens in the 
> background without the user noticing. Since you say you found it 
> awkward, it appears that this has not been the case for you? Perhaps 
> there's a way of fixing that, instead of trying to cover up the 
> symptoms? As it is, my impression is that you made things much more 
> awkward than before. It worked (mostly) nicely for me on Mac OS X 
> before, if it didn't for you on Linux, can you explain how?

Now that I think about it that way (as an implementation detail), I think it
does make things worse.

What I don't like is that Pipmak makes the mouse jump when the mouse moves
over and past the window.  Although, this would not be much of an issue if I
were only playing a Pipmak game, instead of using it for development.  I have
tried Pipmak on Mac OS X (although I don't own a Macintosh), and it is much
smoother on that system.  It seems that this problem occurs on X11, no matter
what the window manager, since someone else on the mailing lists (Urs, I
think) said that he had problems with Pipmak's edge-resistance on KDE's window
manager (KWM, I think), and I have experienced it with three other window
managers (metacity, xfwm, and stumpwm).

Maybe we need to, instead, look at the workaround to prevent the mouse from
becoming permanently grabbed.  I think it was to generate a mouse-motion
event, which would be why the mouse jumps.  Or make it possible to force
grabbing *off* permanently (but this probably would not improve anything).

> Also, being able to ungrab while in direct mouse mode is confusing.

Yes, I admit I had not thought about that.  That makes things even more awkward.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEUEARECAAYFAkrsxpcACgkQjyzTRvYJmaWkEACTBnnipX2W3a90RZVSg0s/iIAF
jACfQKwAFBm8TyNeY4T6OhkJxD9c+10=
=mNdy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----