X server testing

[Thomas Jaeger]

Simon Thum wrote:
> Peter Hutterer wrote:
> 
>> the approach of the patch looks alright to me, but carrying that many
>> parameters around makes me cringe (as said above).
> 
> Same here. Why not represent the value in a
> struct ValuatorAxisValueCoordinateTypeThing {
>     int value;
>     float remainder;
> }
> 
> and ease the function signature bloat this way? (Name should be shorter
> to reach that goal :) One could use NaN as a marker for paths where
> remainder processing is not wanted.

I've thought about this, and I think it might be worth it.  I'd be quite
invasive a patch, but it'd simplify things conceptually.  Also, if we
were ever to decide to switch the internal format from 32+FP to say,
32+32, that would be an easy change.