From: Sam Lantinga
Subject: SDL 1.3 keyboard plan
After lots of discussion with Christian, this is what we came up with:
> So, to sum up...
> SDLK_* become the physical keys, starting at > (1<<21)
> We create a macro SDLK_INDEX(X)
> We have two functions SDL_GetLayoutKey(SDLKey) and SDL_GetKeyName()
> SDL_GetLayoutKey maps to UCS4 for printable characters, and SDLK* for
non-printable characters
> and does so based on the OS's current keyboard layout
> SDL_GetKeyName() handles both SDLK_* and UCS4, converting UCS4 to UTF-8 and
converting SDLK_* into our names, which are UTF-8 for printable characters.
> WASD folks use SDLK_*, and 'I' folks use SDL_GetLayoutKey(SDLK_*)
Here is the patch he came up with, and his e-mail about it:
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 19:50:28 +0200
From: Christian Walther
Subject: Re: SDL 1.3 keyboard plan
> Sounds great, go ahead and send me a patch.
Here goes! Thanks for having a look. Don't hesitate to comment if
anything does not conform to your ideas.
One caveat: Committing this now may break compilability of some video
drivers - specifically, if they use any of the SDLK_* codes that were
obsoleted and moved into SDL_compat.h. I only tried Cocoa (which did
break, but is already fixed) and X11 (which didn't, but then its key
handling is #iffed out). If that's a problem, it may need to go into
a branch.
-Christian
From: David Symmonds
Subject: SDL Typedef Structs
Hi, Thanks for the SDL libraries, I have been using them for about a year
now and they are really brilliant. One thing that I have just found whilst
using them through C++ (and needing forward declarations) is that when you
typedef structs you sometimes use
typedef struct Name
{
...
}Name;
e.g. SDL_Surface
and other times use
typedef struct
{
...
}Name;
e.g. SDL_Rect
The first type works fine, when I define a header file I can just put
'struct Name;' at the top and use the Name throughout. However, the second
type is harder to use in a header, and I haven't found a way yet, other than
to include 'SDL.h' in the header file (undesirable). Would there be any harm
in changing the definition of SDL_Rect and such like to the second form?
