nanogui: Re: NanoX version 0.5
Subject:
RE: NanoX version 0.5
From:
Alex Holden ####@####.####
Date:
18 May 1999 23:38:36 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9905190024190.16616-100000@hyperspace>
On Tue, 18 May 1999, Greg Haerr wrote:
> I suggested this for the very reason that you thought it a good idea
> to toss ReadPixel. Maintaining multiple drivers for similar architectures is more
> of a job than it seems.
I never said that there shouldn't be a readpixel(), and I never "tossed"
it either. I simply haven't implemented it yet in Bogl because I'm not
convinced that's the best way to do it yet. It may be, but I want to do
some additional research on the topic first. Also, a large complex driver
is harder to maintain than several simple ones, and takes up more memory
if you only wanted it to do the function of one of the smaller ones. It
would also probably be slower if it isn't optimised for one specific bit
depth.
--------------- Linux- the choice of a GNU generation. --------------
: Alex Holden (M1CJD)- Caver, Programmer, Land Rover nut, Radio Ham :
-------------------- http://www.linuxhacker.org/ --------------------
