mirror of
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols.git
synced 2026-05-04 21:08:04 +02:00
color: clarify wp_image_description_v1.destroy
Move it up so it's the first defined request. Destruction is such a fundamental part of any interface. Make it more explicit on what destructions means. I imagine compositors to use reference-counted image description implementation objects that are independent of protocol objects. That is already what 'identity' event implies. It would be more hassle to make sure that set_image_description, destroy, commit would actually special-case the destroy, and we would also need to define what that means. Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
3fc7b48ce4
commit
a5cb9be869
1 changed files with 10 additions and 8 deletions
|
|
@ -660,6 +660,16 @@
|
|||
after creation.
|
||||
</description>
|
||||
|
||||
<request name="destroy" type="destructor">
|
||||
<description summary="destroy the image description">
|
||||
Destroy this object. It is safe to destroy a 'failed' object.
|
||||
|
||||
Destroying a wp_image_description_v1 object has no side-effects, not
|
||||
even if a wp_color_management_surface_v1.set_image_description has
|
||||
not yet been followed by a wl_surface.commit.
|
||||
</description>
|
||||
</request>
|
||||
|
||||
<enum name="error">
|
||||
<description summary="protocol errors"/>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -817,13 +827,5 @@
|
|||
|
||||
<arg name="eexp" type="uint" summary="the exponent * 10000"/>
|
||||
</event>
|
||||
|
||||
<request name="destroy" type="destructor">
|
||||
<description summary="destroy the image description">
|
||||
Destroy the wp_image_description_v1 object.
|
||||
Destroying the wp_image_description_v1 which is active on a surface or an
|
||||
output does not change the image description of those objects.
|
||||
</description>
|
||||
</request>
|
||||
</interface>
|
||||
</protocol>
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Reference in a new issue