Adi Oanca <adioanca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > this bug... (a view never receives B_EXITED_VIEW? :O ) > > Yes, that was the problem. Once I added this, the problem went > > away. Might be > > the wrong place for the fix (though it is quite a failsafe place), > > but the > > problem was there. IMHO, this stuff could be handled on the client > > side. Why > > waste CPU cycles in the server for this? But I can have a look at > > _ProcessMouseMovedEvent(), though I seem to remember Axel saying > > something > > about taking on event handling next. > Input handling stuff is just fine. Unless if you don't agree with > my work... > ( don't you remember NEW_INPUT_HANDLING define? ) > > Axel, just wants to move this functionality in another class and > make the cursor thread a reality. > > At least I don't see what Axel could do to this area. Axel? Well, I don't know yet either - but I'll certainly have a look when I'm there. Moving some functionality into the client is definitely desirable, I think. > Why we do this on server side? If done on client side, you can't > send B_EXITED_VIEW to a view if you exited a window's area quickly. Yes, but that's probably no reason to move that functionality completely away from the client. Especially when the client messaging starts to not use ports anymore, this will greatly speed up messaging. Bye, Axel.