-
Sebastian pointed out that the existing text could be read as wl_buffer.destroy not being allowed before the wl_buffer.release event arrives, contrary to what the wl_surface.attach description says. Clarify to be consistent with the latter. This is a follow-up for !141 . Signed-off-by:
Michel Dänzer <mdaenzer@redhat.com> v2: * Simplify clarification, don't talk about callbacks. (Julian Orth) * Add reference to details in the description of wl_surface.attach. (Daniel Stone) v3: * Tweak clarification again. (Sebastian Wick) v4: * Make clarification even less ambiguous. (Simon Ser, Julian Orth) v5: * Just refer to the description of wl_surface.attach instead of trying to clarify anything here. (Sebastian Wick)
Sebastian pointed out that the existing text could be read as wl_buffer.destroy not being allowed before the wl_buffer.release event arrives, contrary to what the wl_surface.attach description says. Clarify to be consistent with the latter. This is a follow-up for !141 . Signed-off-by:
Michel Dänzer <mdaenzer@redhat.com> v2: * Simplify clarification, don't talk about callbacks. (Julian Orth) * Add reference to details in the description of wl_surface.attach. (Daniel Stone) v3: * Tweak clarification again. (Sebastian Wick) v4: * Make clarification even less ambiguous. (Simon Ser, Julian Orth) v5: * Just refer to the description of wl_surface.attach instead of trying to clarify anything here. (Sebastian Wick)
Loading