On Sat, 23 Aug 2014 02:03:29 +0900 Daniel Juyung Seo <[email protected]> said:
> On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Carsten Haitzler <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Sat, 23 Aug 2014 00:31:40 +0900 Daniel Juyung Seo <[email protected] > > > > > said: > > > > > On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Carsten Haitzler <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > raster pushed a commit to branch master. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://git.enlightenment.org/core/elementary.git/commit/?id=66b047481fe9f6a0183fb99c03c70cee8ac6af5a > > > > > > > > commit 66b047481fe9f6a0183fb99c03c70cee8ac6af5a > > > > Author: Carsten Haitzler (Rasterman) <[email protected]> > > > > Date: Fri Aug 22 14:48:13 2014 +0900 > > > > > > > > elm engine choice and logic rationalize > > > > > > > > now that we have ELM_DISPLAY and ELM_ACCEL we have little need for > > a > > > > lot of the elm engine stuff and frankly a lot was broken if you > > used > > > > multiple engines etc. so this fixes a lot of it nd removes a lot of > > > > cruft. i think i got it all right, but i may have oppsied. this > > also > > > > remo9ves engine support for engines long gone from evas. > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > (removed) > > > > > > > > > > @@ -807,8 +807,10 @@ EAPI void > > > > elm_config_password_show_last_timeout_set(double password_show_la > > > > * applications. > > > > * > > > > * @see elm_config_engine_set() > > > > + * > > > > + * @deprecated Please use elm_config_accel_preference_override_get() > > > > instead > > > > */ > > > > -EAPI const char *elm_config_engine_get(void); > > > > +EINA_DEPRECATED EAPI const char *elm_config_engine_get(void); > > > > > > > > > > > OK, now how can I get the engine name with > > > elm_config_accel_preference_override_get()? > > > > why should you need the engine name or care? the whole point of evas, > > ecore-evas and elementary is to abstract/hide that. :) > > > > > To do something like this in elementary_config: > https://git.enlightenment.org/core/elementary.git/tree/src/bin/config.c#n1284 i missed that. forgot to remove it. will remove. because i want to get rid of explicit engine choice. engines are bound to specific display systems. having such things makes code non-portable between x11, wayland, windows, osx etc. - i'm trying to hide these details now behind a fuzzy abstraction so you don't deal with engine directly. there is only one engine i can think of that you might want direct access to, and that'd be buffer. it's unrelated to display system/portability. i havent decided what to do with it yet. -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [email protected] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters. http://tv.slashdot.org/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
