Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken!gauss.llnl.gov!casey
From: casey@gauss.llnl.gov (Casey Leedom)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Does anyone have a fix for R4/PL1 XGetDefault?
Message-ID: <49250@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV>
Date: 20 Feb 90 00:36:23 GMT
References: <49225@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <9002192329.AA01985@expire.lcs.mit.edu>
Sender: usenet@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV
Reply-To: casey@gauss.llnl.gov (Casey Leedom)
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Lines: 17


  Sorry Bob.  I probably shouldn't have sent that last letter off.  I was
very irked which should have told me to go and soak my head for a while
before posting.

  Let me put it a different way: what should an application like awm do
when it wants to dynamically get resources?  It strikes me that a nice
simple interface like XGetDefault is desirable for this.  Having to
construct an XtResource structure array in order to use
XtGetApplicationResources does not strike me as desirable.

  Also, what are the fundamental objections to making XGetDefault handle
multi-level resources.  If the X Consortium is really planning on nuking
XGetDefault, I hope they are planning on replacing it with something
simple to use for simple (or in awm's case, dynamic) cases.

Casey