[2/3] winex11: Returning more reliable value from X11DRV_MsgWaitForMultipleObjects.

[Akihiro Sagawa]

On Thu, 25 Aug 2016 13:35:43 -0500, Ken Thomases wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
(snip)
> In process_events(), you use a variable named "queued" to hold the result
> of calls to event handlers.  That implies that event handlers should
> only return true if they have posted or sent a Windows message or
> hardware input.  But that doesn't seem to be what you've actually done
> in the event handlers.  For example, in the first "if" statement in
> X11DRV_MapNotify(), you return true without queuing anything.
> 
> Instead, you seem to be returning true for some notion of "success"
> in handling events, but I'm not sure how that plays into the rationale
> for this patch.  Am I misunderstanding something?
Ideally, event handlers should return FALSE if they succeed and nothing
is posted or sent by them. However, at that time, I was afraid of
introducing regressions, I limited return FALSE case if the handler
completely fails. So, It's not perfect, yet.
In other words, my patch allows the handler states it never posts/sends
a message by returning FALSE. But returning TRUE doesn't mean there is a
new message.

> I also don't get why you changed the TRACE at the end of
> process_events().  The events really were processed.  They aren't
> "ignored" just because they didn't result in messages or input being
> queued.  Also, shouldn't the return type of process_events() be changed
> to BOOL?
Good point. I'll sent a patch in this weekend.

Thanks too,
Akihiro Sagawa