nanogui: nano-x and mwin
Subject:
RE: nano-x and mwin
From:
Greg Haerr ####@####.####
Date:
3 Dec 1999 19:41:06 -0000
Message-Id: <796896539E6CD311B0E70060083DFEFB076FAE@NBA-SLAM.CenSoft.COM>
having 2 client libaries - one that implements the
: Xlib replacement and one that is a Win32 replacment?
Chris -
This is the idea I've had from the beginning. The whole
original point of the Microwindows api was to allow applications
to be run without learning a new api, or rewriting the application.
With Nano-X, it's somewhat more complicated, since with the
X model noone writes applications at the Xlib level, instead
writes widgets, and there's no widget standard. However,
there are several well known widget sets that would
be nice to run on Nano-X.
However, there is an additional complication to this original
design that I just realized last week. That is, if Nano-X
is exactly the Xlib api (good idea) then when people want
Nano-X to run under X Windows, they get find symbol
collisions with Nano-X and Xlib (nasty trick fixes required).
At this point, I still think a viable compromise, since alot
of folks on this list want the Nano-X on X11 option,
would be to have Nano-X's api be "NXyyy()" where yyy
matches the X11 code. However, when you remove
the display parameter, in most cases, that's what we've
got now, with Gryyy() calls.... So unmodified
applications will be tricky with the X11 driver, unless
that driver is moved to a shared library and the X11
symbols aren't exported.
Greg
