From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Brian Cully Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 3b41141708: Expose the name of an event's input device to Lisp Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2022 08:51:49 -0400 Message-ID: <87r1659jey.fsf@ditto.jhoto.spork.org> References: <164933858147.29834.15050766441005536059@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <87tub4uivu.fsf@yahoo.com> <83y20fakwn.fsf@gnu.org> <87o81bu7zj.fsf@yahoo.com> <83v8vjai4s.fsf@gnu.org> <87bkxbsqfl.fsf@yahoo.com> <835yniah0u.fsf@gnu.org> <8735impqw4.fsf@yahoo.com> <83v8vi8uyu.fsf@gnu.org> <871qy6o9p3.fsf@yahoo.com> <83o81a8qnd.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgkulbuu.fsf@yahoo.com> <83ilri8iag.fsf@gnu.org> <87tub1kbkf.fsf@yahoo.com> <831qy58ofh.fsf@gnu.org> <87sfqlfomt.fsf@yahoo.com> <83wnfx77s0.fsf@gnu.org> <87o819e80r.fsf@yahoo.com> <83sfql73di.fsf@gnu.org> <87ee25cosj.fsf@yahoo.com> <83mtgt712o.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="21151"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 29.0.50 Cc: Po Lu , larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 10 15:08:11 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ndXIZ-0005IU-2k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 10 Apr 2022 15:08:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44648 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ndXIX-0008Ua-Mp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 10 Apr 2022 09:08:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36596) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ndXHn-0007n1-H0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Apr 2022 09:07:23 -0400 Original-Received: from coleridge.kublai.com ([166.84.7.167]:52670 helo=mail.spork.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ndXHl-0007G1-Fi; Sun, 10 Apr 2022 09:07:23 -0400 Original-Received: from ditto (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1b9:8650:a942:ec5e:856b]) by mail.spork.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CA9413527; Sun, 10 Apr 2022 09:07:01 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=spork.org; s=dkim; t=1649596039; bh=IMAkf+bRQghVRHeUzF9AC+lOK/CEonuTUBVPRDqJWes=; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to; b=K9EFR/+m79cNR9nmZwLJ+J6VdZSL/pFqUMDH/xi7dhgjDTV334jtWS7WowaWxwR+N bZwxTZwENOasHR808Io6AS4SWVSci9cpNP4SaDAyiQu1r8gOjhZiLlGRLp3hkQAFX+ F3Sou7+qV2dk0is+gxoY2MDHaHHOeDRSqFDfxWhs= In-reply-to: <83mtgt712o.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=166.84.7.167; envelope-from=bjc@spork.org; helo=mail.spork.org X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:288135 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > Are you saying that querying the system about the connected mice will > enumerate them in random order every time the system is restarted? This is, in the general sense, correct. While enumeration often appears stable, that=E2=80=99s more due to users not often changing their system, and when they do, enumeration order is not normally a factor in how a device functions, so even if things do get re-ordered, no one tends to care. Users do also unplug and replug USB devices pretty frequently, and that changes the device address. At least on Linux, that=E2=80=99s a monotonically increasing counter, and old device addresses aren=E2=80=99t reused until you wrap the counter. And then there=E2=80=99s things like Bluetooth, where devices absolutely do come and go at seemingly random as low power states are entered and left, so enumeration order (such as it is) is a complete wash. I=E2=80=99m not sure how the device naming system in various GUIs reacts to having multiple, identical devices attached, but a conservative guess would be that they=E2=80=99re disambiguated by enumeration order, in which = case even the device name isn=E2=80=99t stable in the presence of identical devi= ces coming and going. There are, of course, stable identifiers (serial number, bluetooth device ID), but I don=E2=80=99t know if those are used for naming purposes. I don=E2=80=99t know how common a situation this is, or if anything can even be done about it, but it=E2=80=99s worth mentioning since= it=E2=80=99s come up more than once in this discussion. -bjc