Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Minitouch fails if ABS_MT_POSITION_X is no supported event code #14

Closed
konradweiss opened this issue Mar 24, 2017 · 2 comments
Closed

Comments

@konradweiss
Copy link

I am currently working on a web emulator where I'm using a strange web emulator where the evdev responsible for screen interaction in /dev/input/ is not supporting the ABS_MT_POSITION_... eventcodes. Probably because this emulator does not support multitouch.

I was able to modify the minitouch code such that ABS_... event codes are used iff ABS_MT_POSITION_... is not supported. If it is ok with you I would like to clean up my code a bit and contribute by creating a pull request?
Do you have any requirements or suggestions how I should handle multiple possible /dev/input files that would then be accepted. What I was Thinking about:

  1. Accept a device in consider_device if one of the two methods is supported and giving ABS_MT_POSITION the preference
  2. Check through all devices and and only if no ABS_MT_POSITION device is found check a second time and accept devices with ABS_X support.
      • an arg in the main that can be set to also allow ABS_X devices
@sorccu
Copy link
Member

sorccu commented Mar 24, 2017

You could possibly use the score system to match non-multitouch devices in a single run, but assigning them a lower score. If that low score ends up being highest, then it would be used automatically. Changes in the state struct would most likely be required, but that's OK.

I would very happily accept a PR that adds singletouch (=mouse/pointer) support, as long as it plays well with the existing code and reasonably attempts to respect the current formatting style.

@sorccu
Copy link
Member

sorccu commented Mar 24, 2018

Let's close this to focus on #15. I've been wanting to take a look at it for a long time but haven't had the time.

@sorccu sorccu closed this as completed Mar 24, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants