On Fri 27 Aug 2004, Shish wrote:
> >>>Log Message:
> >>>added ecore_evas_gl_x11_window_get()
> >>
> >>Is this not redundant? It doesn't do anything different from
> >>software_x11_window_get() as far as I can see. Feels like unneeded bloat.
> >
> >Yes, but the function name clearly indicates that its specific to the
> >engine that's used so it makes sense to have an extra function for the
> >GLX11 engine.
> 
> Which reminds me of something - why is it the app's job to decide which 
> display engine to use? I would have thought it better to have a generic 
> window_get() function for the apps to call, and based on the user 
> config, it either returns a software_x11 or a gl_x11 window (or 
> framebuffer, etc). That way the engine can be set globally or in the 
> per-app config.db, but the user always has the choice of whether to use 
> software or hardware rendering based on their hardware at the time, 
> rather than it being hard coded.

Um, most EFL-based apps currently in CVS already have a config/command
line option to select which engine to use. It's a matter of a simple if
statement at window creation time. And not all apps can use all engines.
For example, Entrance could not use the linuxfb or directfb engines, for
obvious reasons.

-- 

Ibukun Olumuyiwa
http://xcomputerman.com

"God is dead." - Nietzche
"Nietzche is dead." - God



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop
FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools!
Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5047&alloc_id=10808&op=click
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel

Reply via email to