Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!watson.ibm.COM!dan From: dan@watson.ibm.COM (Walt Daniels) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x Subject: Help with double-click recognition. Message-ID: <102389.141415.dan@watson.ibm.com> Date: 23 Oct 89 18:14:15 GMT Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 27 Walt Daniels >Stan Switzer sjs@bellcore.com >>Bruce G. Barnett uunet!crdgw1!barnett >Well, frankly, it comes a quite a surprise to me that you can't do >double click detection in X, but is quite easy in NeWS. I believe it is just as easy to do in X, but it is done client side with much the same technique. The problem is that client side is slower by a network delay or two. >Here's a routine to check if a click is, in fact, a double click. >... >If you wanted to be more clever, you could download a global click >processor that converted all multiple clicks into distinct events for >distribution. It would probably be a bad idea, though, since it would >make all single clicks just a little bit sluggish. Notice that even done server side the possibility of double click makes single click slower by the permissible time constant of the double click which may be comparable with normal (not extreme) network delay. >>IMHO If multiple-clicks were to become a standard, it should be used for >>accelerators, unnecessary to know about but useful if available. This seems reasonable. One will quickly notice that on a slow network they are not useful and resort to the more reliable way of achieving the same results.