On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:17:12 +0300 Jussi Laako <[email protected]> said:
> On 12.4.2014 6:09, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > > to route you have to see. content + context determines routing. didn't i > > already repeat about grabs, coordinate transformation etc. > > No, you don't need to know if I hit 'a' or 'b' on the keyboard to do > routing. Just as you don't need to decrypt IP packets carrying SSL > communication to route those. i have explained this to you several times. you do need to know due to grabs. i'm not going to explain it yet another time. > > people who do this for a living have been down this design path and explored > > it. it doesn't work. it scales horribly. look at x11 shape extension. > > people who have been doing display systems for a long time. like most of > > their professional lives. and that's a lot of years. i agree with them. > > there isn't just a single matrix. it's far more complex than that. you > > can't do transforms over a bunny > > How is this related to anything I type on this keyboard? you route all input in a simple consitsent manner via the same daemon, otherwise it's a mess. and regardless, grabs require key routing per press and based on its content and current state. since i seem to be repeating myself ... i think i'll stop. > I happily trade shaped windows for rectangular boxes for security. > > OpenGL also keeps texture transformation data and texture pixmaps > separate. You upload the pixmap and then tell what kind of > transformation you want. OpenGL doesn't need to understand if it's > pixmap of stone surface or pixmap of hand-written letter 'a'. You could > even encrypt all pixmaps with public key cryptography to GPU's private key. > > > mesh - or a sphere, or a curled piece of paper with a single matrix. you > > need a vast detailed mesh. and as animation changes, this mesh keeps > > changing. handing > > Still it's separate from the content. > > > graphics is several orders of magnitude more complex and doesn't have a > > defined standard ala tcp/ip that has to be adhered to. it's freeform. > > It is not, just check out LTE networking from right from the radio > signalling layer up to the IP packet layer. The radio DSP algorithms are > much more complex than your average desktop graphics algorithms. But > still the DSP layer doesn't and shouldn't understand what happens > several layers above and vice versa. > > > pulse audio sees all the audio data. it goes through it. also routing is > > insanely simpler, and it's pa that defines the routing posibilites and > > design, > > You just think all the audio DSP is insanely simpler because you don't > know about it or understand it... > > Pulse audio sees some of the audio data, but not all. But routing > decision is made by Murphy without seeing the audio data. But neither > one understands if I'm listening Mahler or Pink Floyd. > > I'm also accessing hw1:0 device directly on Ubuntu for example, > bypassing pulseaudio for serious music listening cases because otherwise > pulseaudio would screw up the audio quality. (and most of the time I'm > using 5.6 MHz DSD audio format which pulseaudio doesn't know anything about) > > > you need access to pixel data to know if there is an alpha or transparency > > area and if events are to drop through that area or not. you need access to > > the > > Again, how is this related to keyboard input events. Display server > spying on my password inputs? > > > efforts, the display server has access to all input. be that xorg (and thus > > any x11 client via xinput), or wayland (only the display server has that > > access, and can send/grant/route input to clients as it sees fit based on > > its policies. > > Well, it doesn't have access to my voice control input at least. So I > can spell out passwords through voice. > > And I can also easily isolate it from my password inputs without the > display server being aware of it at all. (keyboard capture mux at kernel > input layer level) > > > but they will never exist. so you live in a world far away from everyone > > else and far away from tizen. back in the real world, this is not the case, > > and never will be because it's impractical. i think you should just go make > > your own os, and the os you want is not the one the rest of us work on and > > use. :) > > Again, I have it already neatly in form of changes on top of Yocto. :) > -- Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
