Talk:XCB

message: Most operating systems use Xlib/XCB for their libX11 -- This already has a citation needed mark, but I think it's best just removed from the article. A cursory glance shows that Ubuntu keeps XCB in Universe up through the current release (Natty) (which probably means debian doesn't seem to install it by default), Fedora doesn't have a package(?), and Suse might be installing it by default, I can't quite tell. Additionally, the only window manager that currently uses it (and thus a major reason a distro would install it by default) is Awesome_(window_manager). "An operating system can use Xlib/XCB for its libX11" would be a more correct statement and would share a citation with the next statement. 64.122.73.112 (talk) 16:36, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: XLIB/XCB

message: I submitted X Window core protocol for peer review, as I intend to candidate it for featured status. I would appreciate comments (Peer review page). - Liberatore(T) 18:07, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review of a related article 

message: In the example, I see a function XCBWaitForEvent. As far as I understand, this function actually waits for events on the network, and this is different than the corresponding Xlib function (which looks a local queue). If this is correct, it may be a good idea to mention, as it looks like a big differnce. - Liberatore(T) 11:51, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there is also an internal event queue in XCB. Both XCB and Xlib will block if the queue is empty. --IanOsgood 19:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. This could be added to the article, now or in the future (Liberatore, 2006). 20:52, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: I just read this article and studied the code example carefully.  Everything is well written and the example is
very readable, except for the line:  switch (e->response_type & ~0x80).  Shouldn't there be a #define for the
~0x80 whose name conveys some concrete meaning to the corresponding bits of response_type?  Or is this relying on some advanced trickery which doesn't make for a good teaching example?  Thanks. Jlenthe (talk) 18:30, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this, the higher bit indicates whether the event is synthetic, that is, originating from a sent request of another client. According this explanation, the bit should be removed before checking the event type. And, there is no define for it... Tizio 14:15, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whats with the 0x80? 

message: Anybody knows where to find real documentation on the XCB API? I've searched the XCB website, the Wiki, Google. XcbApi appears to be just a few pages documenting some irrelevant structures and definitions.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vedge (talk • contribs) 03:11, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documentation? 

message: Every source currently on this topic cites the developers of this library (release announcements by the developers do not count, either).  There are no third-party sources cited, no knowledgeable reviews, etc.  TEDickey (talk) 10:21, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  primary sources tag 

message: Under "Other language bindings", surely only xcffib should be mentioned as the Python binding. xpyb is obsolete, no longer maintained, only works with Python 2, no longer in most distros' repositories. I propose removing it completely. Any objections? Longitude2 (talk) 21:41, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other language bindings 

message: The topic states that "Creators of XCB have invented a specialized interface description language" which given the trivial example, is some editor's gross exaggeration to claim that an XML-based schema is a "specialized interface description language". TEDickey (talk) 19:07, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  xml dialect is not an invention