From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Removing assumption of unsigned long pixel values for colours Date: Tue, 07 May 2019 05:29:50 +0300 Message-ID: <838svjj8td.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87v9yqjdnh.fsf@gmail.com> <83a7g2kqsi.fsf@gnu.org> <87lfzlkeic.fsf@gmail.com> <83zho0khdu.fsf@gnu.org> <87h8a8k84a.fsf@gmail.com> <83pnowjo63.fsf@gnu.org> <87d0kvk489.fsf@gmail.com> <83ftprk2nj.fsf@gnu.org> <874l67k0lp.fsf@gmail.com> <83d0kvjzfg.fsf@gnu.org> <87zhnzijy6.fsf@gmail.com> <83bm0fjxdq.fsf@gnu.org> <83a7fzjwdz.fsf@gnu.org> <87pnovics5.fsf@gmail.com> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="68043"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alex Gramiak Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 07 04:30:37 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hNpsK-000HZV-Vn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 May 2019 04:30:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36968 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hNpsJ-0000Gf-Tk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 May 2019 22:30:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:53020) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hNprr-0008Rm-M0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 May 2019 22:30:08 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:51347) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hNprr-0006KZ-Kp; Mon, 06 May 2019 22:30:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3995 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1hNprq-0007yj-La; Mon, 06 May 2019 22:30:07 -0400 In-reply-to: <87pnovics5.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Alex Gramiak on Mon, 06 May 2019 13:49:30 -0600) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:236222 Archived-At: > From: Alex Gramiak > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Mon, 06 May 2019 13:49:30 -0600 > > Sure, though I don't know what relevant information is missing; the goal > of this thread was to determine if a certain change is suitable > _assuming_ that such a backend is submitted with the change, and that > the backend needs it (or rather finds it sufficiently useful). I just > wanted to avoid having to implement the union scheme fully and having to > revert it upon review. It turns out that it was good to post this, since > I was assured that using the integral representation is good enough. I wasn't saying that the question shouldn't have been asked. I was saying that, once the union idea was off the table, discussing alternatives would be better delayed until the need for that is clear, and that needs to see the clients of such alternatives. > I can just restrict the colours to 8bpc in the meantime. Thanks. I think you could also assume 16 bpp on 64-bit hosts.