On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 05:11:00PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, 2011-10-17 at 15:59 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
quoted
I'm not saying that it's a problem. I'm saying that your approach
changes behavioural semantics in a way that may violate application
expectations just as surely as changing the timer behaviour does.
There's no free approach.
I'm not saying its free, I'm saying its a much better approach since it
gets rid of the entire problem instead of papering over the worst of it.
It solves it for a specific case, ie animations. Any other timer driven
behaviour continues. It really does need to be tied to session idle, not
application visibility, and enforcement at the X level does nothing to
help that.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org