Hi,

On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 10:25:45PM +0200, Andreas Mohr wrote:

Hi,

quoted

+       ts->snap_down[swapped] = -inactive_area_left;
+       ts->snap_up[swapped] = max_x + inactive_area_right;
+       ts->snap_down[!swapped] = -inactive_area_top;
+       ts->snap_up[!swapped] = max_y + inactive_area_bottom;
+       ts->snap_down_on[swapped] = snap_left_on;
+       ts->snap_down_off[swapped] = snap_left_off;
+       ts->snap_up_on[swapped] = max_x - snap_right_on;
+       ts->snap_up_off[swapped] = max_x - snap_right_off;
+       ts->snap_down_on[!swapped] = snap_top_on;
+       ts->snap_down_off[!swapped] = snap_top_off;
+       ts->snap_up_on[!swapped] = max_y - snap_bottom_on;
+       ts->snap_up_off[!swapped] = max_y - snap_bottom_off;

Could this perhaps be represented by _one_ struct definition
and two representations of it, one for swapped and one for non-swapped case or so?
(although sometimes it´s reverted logic, might need more thought)
Sounds like an awful lot of repeated array calculations for no overly good reason
(unless gcc happens to fully optimize it into oblivion automatically).

-ETOOMUCHBEER

Of course we need to swap orthogonal members individually,
thus this kind of code.
However maybe there´s still a more elegant way of doing this.

Andreas Mohr