Code review comment for lp://staging/~vanvugt/mir/parenting-server-api
Revision history for this message
| Cemil Azizoglu (cemil-azizoglu) wrote | # |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
5466644
demo site
(Get the code!)
> I'm also wondering about type morphing, which design wants us to support...
> What if a surface morphs from type A to type B and only type B requires
> parenting?
>
> In that case you'd have to reject a simple set_type() request and add more
> client functions that do an atomic set_type_B(surface, newparent). So there's
> the scalability issue still, and you do gain atomicity, but I'm not sure that
> atomicity is more important than the scalability advantage.
Yes the API that has been agreed upon with tvoss would require additional functions to handle this case. I don't think this is the correct venue if you have concerns about this approach. Talking to Thomas directly might be more effective.