nanogui: source tree
Subject:
Re: source tree
From:
"Greg Haerr" ####@####.####
Date:
15 Dec 1999 17:47:57 -0000
Message-Id: <007601bf4712$e3544f40$15320cd0@gregh>
: i think the source tree needs to be tidied up abit with
: a better structure.
Yes, I agree. I plan on having that done for 0.87 final,
but I had some submissions (like running on X11) that
everyone got excited about, and I decided to integrate
them first.
Also, Martin has submitted a makefile rewrite
that I plan to use in 0.87. It creates dependencies
automatically, and also builds a "make xconfig"
that allows different options to be set graphically
under X, rather than editing a makefile. I am
looking for a "make config" that does the same
thing, like the Linux kernel.
i am happy to sit down and write
: Makefile.am and a configure.in so what we can make the
: source tree easier to compile on yet more os'. one
: f the reasons being is that i would like to be able to use
: nanox + X11 on solaris.
Yes, I may take you up on this. I'd like to add
Martin's submission, and then perhaps you could
look at it from the multiple OS perspective. BTW,
does running on Solaris mean not using GNU make?
:
: on another note following what i said about the gtk port
: i was thinking that it might be an idea to rewrite nanox
: to have an api far more similar to X. this means that
: it can be completey restructured. this would include using
: event structures and window structes etc excatly as
: X does. the all anano x calls can be n<X call> and then
: have macro substituions on compile time.
As others have mentioned, this idea has been discussed
before. I think I was one of the first to bring it up.
Although I like the idea of making the procedure
calls very close to Xlib's (this is exactly the path
that Microwindows API took), making
the data structures identical will make Nano-X
way too big. The color model is a perfect example.
X's color model implementation is damn near as big
as all of Nano-X alone.
So, IMHO, realistically, we should look at what API
calls are close and could be made identical, and which
calls will remain different for some time (like color).
Also, at this point, the Nano-X and Microwindows
API's are really in there initial stages. There's quite a bit
more programming required to make them run the
wide spectrum of calls offered by X11 or Windows.
Perhaps you could send the list a set of concepts
or particular API calls that aren't implemented yet
that need to be.
Regards,
Greg
