Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!apple!oliveb!tymix!tardis!jms
From: jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Mutual Exclude Gadgets
Summary: Who assigns the bit numbers?
Keywords: Gadgets
Message-ID: <899@tardis.Tymnet.COM>
Date: 2 Jan 90 19:53:00 GMT
References: <953@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> <9173@cbmvax.commodore.com> <22900@ut-emx.UUCP>
Reply-To: jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith)
Organization: BT Tymnet, San Jose, CA
Lines: 23

In article <22900@ut-emx.UUCP> hcobb@walt.cc.utexas.edu (Henry J. Cobb) writes:
>	Mr Sinz is right, the documented procedure would not work.  Why not use
>the field as a bit-map, whenever a gadget becomes selected any other gadgets
>with which it has a matching bit set, is deselected.
>	Example:
>Gadget A has bits 2 & 3 set
>Gadget B has bits 4 & 6 set
>Gadget C has bits 3 & 6 set
>	A and B will not deactivate each other but C will exclude both.  If a
>gadget has no bits set it neither excludes nor is excluded by any other gadget.

After reading the follow-up postings and email from Henry, I am still missing
something.  In the example above, who decides that bit 2 is available for use
by gadget A?  If it's decided by the programmer at compile time, then the
code won't work if bit 2 is one of the bits assigned to a system gadget.
(It will exclude the system gadget when that was not what is desired.)
If it's determined at run time, then how is this information passed back to
the program?  I like the idea, but how is it implemented?
-- 
Joe Smith (408)922-6220 | SMTP: JMS@F74.TYMNET.COM or jms@gemini.tymnet.com
BT Tymnet Tech Services | UUCP: ...!{ames,pyramid}!oliveb!tymix!tardis!jms
PO Box 49019, MS-D21    | PDP-10 support: My car's license plate is "POPJ P,"
San Jose, CA 95161-9019 | humorous dislaimer: "My Amiga speaks for me."