Is this intended as a "bug fix" for 1.4.0 or is it a "feature request" to be implemented in 1.5.0?

A 1.4 bug fix and code quality improvement.

These changes might also affect users that add their own schemes but since we don't know such user code [2] I'm also reluctant to introduce code changes that might affect schemes in 1.4.0 (1.4.x).

It should not. Existing code should work the same, except for the underscore versions, but that's easy to remedy by giving two enum constants the same value. I would not use a #define for that.

That said, I support these changes in general but I don't think that the entire "refactoring" is suitable for 1.4.0, it should probably be postponed (1.5.0) although I would like to have a much smaller patch that introduces the new focus box drawing in 1.4.0 (if this could be done in a backwards compatible way).

Yeah, that's how it started, but I needed to duplicate some code (minor) which triggered the refactoring. I can make a small patch if you feel more comfortable with that.

[2] IIRC the TigerVNC project defines an own scheme or at least they're doing something very similar but there may be other projects as well.

The patch removes the link feature for our existing code. External changes to schemes and box types should continue to work as before.

But ok, I will commit just the focus fix for now when I have the time to extract that.

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: <fltk/fltk/pull/958/c2077709417@github.com>