Could VsyncProvider be in mir::graphics instead of mir::frontend?
new whitespace
324 +
int64_t mir_surface_get_last_display_time(MirSurface *surface)
The naming has some interesting implications... like could the client api user rely on this to roughly see how long the screen has been off? Also, I'd think that the vsync stuff would be in mir_connection with the rest of the display stuff.
Seems like a lot of rigging where we could just have
mg::Display::last_vsync_for(graphics::DisplayConfigurationOutputId output) = 0;
and the server code could just use the existing the_display() function.
First pass:
Could VsyncProvider be in mir::graphics instead of mir::frontend?
new whitespace
324 +
int64_t mir_surface_ get_last_ display_ time(MirSurface *surface)
The naming has some interesting implications... like could the client api user rely on this to roughly see how long the screen has been off? Also, I'd think that the vsync stuff would be in mir_connection with the rest of the display stuff.
599 + virtual std::chrono: :nanoseconds last_vsync_ for(graphics: :DisplayConfigu rationOutputId output) = 0; ptr<frontend: :VsyncProvider> the_vsync_ provider( ); ptr<frontend: :VsyncProvider> vsync_provider() = 0;
and
204 + virtual std::shared_
and
184 + virtual std::shared_
Seems like a lot of rigging where we could just have :last_vsync_ for(graphics: :DisplayConfigu rationOutputId output) = 0;
mg::Display:
and the server code could just use the existing the_display() function.