[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: `term' prefix for gpm support
From: |
Nick Roberts |
Subject: |
Re: `term' prefix for gpm support |
Date: |
Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:35:43 +1200 |
> > By the way, am I the only one annoyed by the Gpm code's use of the
> > `term' prefix? I mean `term-open-connection' sounds like a very odd
> > choice of name for a function which "Open a connection to Gpm."
>
> Agreed. I would even say that the GPM code in term.c can go into a
> separate file, that will reduce the amount of #ifdefs in term.c.
Maybe t-mouse-open, t-mouse-close would be better. I can't recall how I
arrived at those names but it was probably convoluted.
There are four #ifdef HAVE_GPM blocks in term.c which doesn't seem that many
(term.c has 21 ifdefs in all). More importantly, when I wrote it, the gpm code
called static functions in term.c like write_glyphs. If after multi-tty these
functions are no longer part of term.c, maybe the gpm code can go into a
separate file.
I have no strong opinions about these issues and certainly don't mind if
someone wants to make changes.
--
Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob