<div dir="ltr">Hi,<div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 28 November 2014 at 06:02, Peter Hutterer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:peter.hutterer@who-t.net" target="_blank">peter.hutterer@who-t.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:17:33PM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote:</span></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="h5">
> diff --git a/Xi/exevents.c b/Xi/exevents.c<br>
> index b0bc47e..cd2924a 100644<br>
> --- a/Xi/exevents.c<br>
> +++ b/Xi/exevents.c<br>
> @@ -810,6 +810,7 @@ UpdateDeviceState(DeviceIntPtr device, DeviceEvent *event)<br>
> case ET_ButtonPress:<br>
> case ET_ButtonRelease:<br>
> case ET_KeyPress:<br>
> + case ET_KeyFocusIn:<br>
<br>
</div></div>I would honestly prefer some different name. We do real focus in events, I'd<br>
like to avoid potential confusion here. How about ET_ServerFocusIn?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yeah. I was going to use ET_KeymapNotify since that matches the relevant X11 event, but that is literally the worst-named event in the entire protocol.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="h5">> diff --git a/xkb/xkbActions.c b/xkb/xkbActions.c<br></div></div><div><div class="h5">
> index c6cbf56..c075115 100644<br>
> --- a/xkb/xkbActions.c<br>
> +++ b/xkb/xkbActions.c<br>
> @@ -1144,9 +1144,10 @@ _XkbEnsureStateChange(XkbSrvInfoPtr xkbi)<br>
> }<br>
><br>
> static void<br>
> -_XkbApplyState(DeviceIntPtr dev, Bool genStateNotify, int evtype, int key)<br>
> +_XkbApplyState(DeviceIntPtr dev, Bool genStateNotify, int evtype_int, int key)<br>
<br>
</div></div>.. Bool genStateNotify, enum EventType evtype, int key)<br>
<br>
we have an enum, use it, it's much more expressive than "int evtype_int".<br>
coincidentally, storage is cheap enough these days that we could, on<br>
average, afford to add "internal" instead of just "int".</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yeah, my bad.</div><div><br></div><div>Will fix up all the rest, but I guess it's basically all pending on what falls out of 3/3. Up to you; I don't really mind (or think it makes any difference tbh) either way.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Dan</div></div></div></div>