D27778: Use AbstractClient instead of XdgShellClient wherever possible

[Vlad Zahorodnii]

zzag added a comment.


  In D27778#620646 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D27778#620646>, @davidedmundson wrote:
  
  > Just to confirm as I didn't expect some of this change, the plan is still to have:
  >
  > class XdgShellTopLevel: public XdgShellClient
  >  class XdgShellPopup: public XdgShellClient
  
  
  Yeah, sort of...
  
  class XdgSurfaceClient : public AbstractClient {};
  class XdgToplevelClient : public XdgSurfaceClient {};
  class XdgPopupClient : public XdgSurfaceClient {};

INLINE COMMENTS

> davidedmundson wrote in abstract_client.h:443
> why does this now have to be public?

Otherwise, kwin won't compile. We're calling addTransient() from XdgShellClient::handleTransientForChanged().

> davidedmundson wrote in workspace.cpp:695
> Can you clarify this is just a code move from the above?
> 
> It's frustrating to review these patches checking line by line as it takes a lot waaay longer than it took the developer to do the original copy paste.

It's the same.

> It's frustrating to review these patches checking

Yes, I know. I squashed a lot of changes that should be separate because of the goddamn review process on Phabricator.

REPOSITORY
  R108 KWin

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phabricator.kde.org/D27778

To: zzag, #kwin
Cc: davidedmundson, kwin, Orage, LeGast00n, The-Feren-OS-Dev, cblack, jraleigh, zachus, fbampaloukas, GB_2, mkulinski, ragreen, jackyalcine, iodelay, crozbo, bwowk, ZrenBot, ngraham, alexeymin, himcesjf, lesliezhai, ali-mohamed, hardening, romangg, jensreuterberg, abetts, sebas, apol, ahiemstra, mart
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kwin/attachments/20200302/7de1bbe7/attachment.html>