Re: Status of MAC/W32/X consolidation and some questions.

[Benjamin Riefenstahl]

Hi Kim,


address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) writes:
> [There are a couple of MAC and W32 specific questions in this mail.
> Those who know these ports well, please take a look at them.]

I am not by any means an expert on the code, but I have some thoughts.

> Now, what I'm currently working on is to replace all mac* and w32*
> specific names with the corresponding x* names,
> e.g. FRAME_MAC_WINDOW is replaced by FRAME_X_WINDOW,

I guess this is probably the fastest path and would mostly leave alone
the X11 code.  But wouldn't it in theory better to rename those items
to a neutral FRAME_GUI_ANYTHING instead?  When I look at code I find
the tendency to re-use X11 names outside of X11 rather irritating.

> * Does the W32 version support -nw?

Yes. 

>   If so, is FRAME_W32_P still true when specified?

No.  If I read the code right, FRAME_W32_P is based on output_method,
and output_method can be interrogated as the result of the (framep)
function.  "(framep (selected-frame))" returns t (for "character-only
terminal") in this situation.

> Also, since I cannot really test the changes on MAC and W32, I do
> expect that I'm going to make a few mistakes in the consolidation,
> resulting in non-functional MAC and W32 versions on the CVS head,
> which I hope some of you will assist me in solving (I hope/expect it
> is just a matter of fixing some trivial compilation errors).

I can probably help with that. 


so long, benny