Re: [g-a-devel] AccessibleDeviceEventMask and SPI_registerDeviceEventListener()
- From: "Quiring, Sam" <Sam Quiring windriver com>
- To: "Nagappan A" <nagappan gmail com>
- Cc: gnome-accessibility-devel gnome org
- Subject: Re: [g-a-devel] AccessibleDeviceEventMask and SPI_registerDeviceEventListener()
- Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:33:44 -0800
Hi Nagappan,
Really? So the Python at-spi interface
is better maintained than the C interface? After reading your email I did
some googling (I've been ignoring all things python since I'm working in
C). I see that there is quite a bit of at-spi activity in Python, for
example it looks like LDTP has abandoned C and is exclusively being worked on in
Python now, is that true?. Thanks a lot for the heads
up.
Is reliability a problem for other parts of the at-spi
C interface? Or is it mainly just an issue with
events?
-Sam
Hi Sam,
2008/12/12 Quiring, Sam
<Sam Quiring windriver com>
Greetings,
I have this call in my
app:
#define
BUTTON_EVENTS (SPI_BUTTON_PRESSED |
SPI_BUTTON_RELEASED)
SPI_registerDeviceEventListener(mouse_device_listener, BUTTON_EVENTS,
0);
On the other hand, I believe I am receiving
the correct amount of button_pressed
events.
The events generated in CSPI is not reliable as compared to the
pyatspi. If possible, I recommend to use pyatspi. Also another advantage will
be, when we move to DBus from CORBA, as of now we don't have CSPI for DBus based
implementation.
Thanks
Nagappan
Are there any known bugs in this
area?
-Sam
_______________________________________________
Gnome-accessibility-devel
mailing list
Gnome-accessibility-devel gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
--
Linux Desktop (GUI Application) Testing Project -
http://ldtp.freedesktop.orghttp://nagappanal.blogspot.com
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]