Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>>>>>> "Peter" == Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Peter> I've reproduced the error and fixed it. The problem was, not
> Peter> only page up/down keys were dropped. This code does not work
> Peter> (because of the implicit casts?)
>
> Peter> static const int delayed_keys = Qt::Key_PageDown |
> Peter> Qt::Key_PageUp; if (e->key() & delayed_keys) {
>
> I know this stuff is very difficult to get right, but I do not like at
> all the idea of testing explicitely qt::pageup/down. We should not
> depend on these hardcoded keys. For example, your patch will fail for
> people who use the emacs bindings and use Ctrl+v for page down. I am
> not asking for adding another case for Ctrl+v (!) but I'd prefer a
> solution which does not take this into account (especially since I do
> not understand why only PageDown would be a problem (why is paragraph
> down not a problem?)
>
> JMarc
>
Yes, I also don't like the hardcoding. The problem is that if we start
to drop events we have to differentiate between good and bad events, and
it is hard to find a solution for all cases. So it would be better not
to drop any key. But what is the alternative? A XSync call could block
the main thread, but suppresses it the auto generated key events? Does
it not eat user generated events?
Peter
