On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 20:32 +0100, Christian Walther wrote:
> Bob Pendleton wrote:
> > Tools, not rules. You can't force people to do things the way you think
> > they should be done.
> It's not my intention to force anything. I just want to make it *easy*
> to do things right, because otherwise I fear it's not going to be done.
> Of course, if it turns out that my idea of what's "right" is not
> universally accepted (and I'm grateful if that is pointed out to me),
> then there's nothing I can do but shut up, I guess... :)
Well, in this case I was wrong because I did not look at how this was
implemented in SDL 1.2. I still don't like it, but being compatible is
better for the end users.
> > It is better to give someone a tool that lets
> > them do what they want rather than to force them to work around what you
> > think it should be.
> Certainly. Personally, I'm happy as long as it's *possible* to do things
> right. In this particular case that means, given a layout key code,
> present it to the user in a way that uniquely identifies the key to him.
> That means, being able to distinguish between keyboard and keypad keys
> that type the same character. And I see no other way for this than the
> magic bit we're trying to get rid of...
I now see how you got to the magic keypad bit. But, I don't think it is
the correct solution because, as I understand it,
SDL_GetLayoutKey(SDLK_1) == code point for 1
SDL_GetLayoutKey(SDLK_KP_1) == code point for 1 | magic key pad bit.
But, there is no good way for a developer to test for 1 | magic key pad
bit. There is no enumeration of these values and it forces the
programmer to create them and know what they are. Adding that bit means
that SDL_GetLayoutKey really returns 3 different types of value, SDLK_*,
Unicode code points, and something that is not a code point nor an
> SDL mailing list
+ Bob Pendleton: writer and programmer +
+ email: Bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx +
+ web: www.GameProgrammer.com +
+ www.Wise2Food.com +
+ nutrient info on 7,000+ common foods +
SDL mailing list