On 11/17/2015 04:34 AM, Maxthon Chan wrote: > Sorry… > > If this is the case then I would suggest those AppKit and UIKit > enhances, sort of bringing GNUstep up to speed with OS X: > > 1) Storyboards. This is how Xcode arrange user interfaces now. 2) > QuartzCore and WIndowServer based on Wayland and EGL. This will > replace Window Maker with a higher performance interface engine, and > replace gnustep-back entirely. (“windowmaker-wayland” is a > Wayland-only compositor that have the OS X look and feel, > “gnustep-qe” implements QuartzCore API using Wayland and EGL, and > gnustep-gui rewritten to use gnustep-qe instead of gnustep-back) 3) > Metal, which can be mapped to Vulcan(“gnustep-metal-vulcan”), Mantle > (for AMD cards, “gnustep-metal-mantle”) or CUDA (for nVIDIA cards, > “gnustep-metal-cuda”) 4) SceneKit and SpriteKit, both can be > implemented on top of Metal. 5) loginwindow (which is necessary in > building a complete desktop experience) >
Well, the biggest problem is the (nearly) complete lack of integration between CoreBase & Base (NSRunLoop) and opal & quartzcore & gnustep-gui. And even apps that don't make any CG/CA calls cause crashes, simply because -gui was never really tested with real OS X apps. (I will work on CFRunLoop-based NSRunLoop in near future.) Right now, my impression is that if I spend a few months hacking on a new CG/CA/AppKit implementation layered on top of Qt's accelerated rendering engine, it will suck big time, but still have a better compatibility and performance. 2) My point is not to clone OS X, so I'd leave this to X11/Qt/... 3) and 4) The question is how many apps need this. -- Luboš Doležel _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
