On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 03:08:30PM -0700, Bill Spitzak wrote: > It does sound like far more people are using fltk1 than 2, and I agree > that compatability between them has drifted pretty far. > > I think the best solution would be to start with 1.3 and re-make fltk2 > from it. We would keep the existing fltk2 code as a source of code to > copy, but all changes would be made more carefully to preserve > back-compatability. It is a good solution. But it has its disadvantages:
1) As long as I can see, changes you describe later in this letter break compatibility to ashes. The API will be ever changing, so if I had a 100k-lined project in fltk1, I would not port it. 2) No fltk2. If one has a project in fltk2, he must either keep it depending on a dead library and wait, or port it to fltk1 interface and keep it changing back towards ftlk2... I'll choose the first. We will have some stability in core, but in interface... It will be like an embryon going through fish and frog stages in its development from fltk1 to fltk2(3?). _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
