On Sun, 2 Mar 2003 11:58:44 +0000 José Fonseca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > To me, thats arse backwards. It should be that the documentation > > eases people into develpoing the code. not the other way round. > > But there *are* specs for the Voodoo 3, so what are you complaining > about!? I'm sorry to give such breaking news, but things just _don't_ > appear by themselves. Not a DRI driver, not documentation, ... > *nothing*. I wasnt complaining about the voodoo3. At the time I wanted to help fix problems on my radeon 7500. I gave up, however, when it was clear no-one would give me any specs at all, unless I did something like rewrite half the driver to 'prove' myself. (the mail archives are full of stuff like that). > I agree that documentation is important and there is alot that can be > done in that field, but then why don't developers-wanna-be, instead of > whinning about lack of documentation, don't do something about it? Because when you're a 'developer wanna-be' you dont have the knowledge to DO anything about it. > BTW, Doxygen documentation for a subset of the radeon driver, the core > of Mesa, the full DRM are in the forge - under the embedded Mesa > umbrella. Thats a really logical place to find them. really. (well, the mesa core, ok, but the radeon driver stuff should be under the DRI umbrella. > Note that documentation only helps until a certain point. No matter > how much documented the existing code base is, No, its a matter of how documented the HARDWARE is. the code I dont really care about. Not hard to figure out code. > it will still be _hard_ > to write a driver from ground up, as it take alot of lines of code, > and the proporcional debugging time. Of course. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
