Open Timidger opened 7 years ago
For resource, do we just want to return the pointer or the wl_resource? I've got code implemented that returns the wl_resource. It's mainly semantics but mainly wondering..
Honestly for those it's not a big deal since it'll probably never be used by the library user.
Just make an unsafe function that returns whatever is in the struct. Eg if it's a pointer don't dereference it just return it.
This is one of the globals that the compositor needs to create at startup.
Either it needs to be provided in the constructor (like the I/O managers) or it needs to be passed in later (like the extension protocols).
I'm up for either, leaning towards the latter since this is sort of an "extension" and it's possible that a compositor may not want to implement this interface (and we should take a page out of wlroots' book and let the user decide).
Either way, it needs to live as long as the compositor and destroyed before it disconnects.
Need to also ensure only one global is registered at a time of this type.
Functions
send_selection
Needs to only be possible if the DnD global has been made (so if an instance was made of the struct). Needs SeatClient to be made first.set_selection
DataOffer
Events
destroy
Functions
dnd_actions
Return bitfield, please wrap in abitfield!
in_ask
resource
(unsafe)data_source
(ReturnDataSource
)DataSource
Events
destroy
Functions
resource
(unsafe)offer
(ReturnDataOffer
seat_client
(Return SeatClient)mime_types
(Wrap inVec
)accepted
current_dnd_action
dnd_actions
Return bitfield, like inDataOffer
compositor_actions
Return bitfield, like inDataOffer
actions_set
Global Callbacks
They should be callable, setting them may be unsafe but probably not. They are already initialized in global creation. Double check because this could be safe.
accept
send
cancel
Global Cleanup