Re: uniform input device packets?

Mathieu Bouchard (boum01@UQAH.UQuebec.CA)
Thu, 25 Jun 1998 06:06:17 -0400 (EDT)

> On the other hand, both might work at once (and we could use
> this for force-feedback, too). I think we should use separate event
> types for leds, and motors and such, too, because these
> simply are not keys, eventhough they're booleans and or
> integers.

i would not agree, to keep it simpler. the application should know, or it
should be fetchable through ioctl/special events. What is absint#5
please? "Speed of Motor XZ".

> If you used 3*, you'd use one byte more, but would have
> 65535 axes as well, and won't have trouble reporting status
> of a nuclear plant control panel ;)
> Myself I think it is better to use more bytes than to use
> more complex routines.

I would tend to agree to a certain point. I'm using only whole number of
nibbles in the protocol right now, just changed the relint/absint stuff to
16 indexes, 65536 values. Might go to the byte way tomorrow, who knows :-)

matju

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu