Am 27.02.2010 10:46, manolo gouy wrote:
> Introduced in FLTK-Fl_Printer branch device abstraction and PostScript
> output
> using Roman's ideas and code.
> Many thanks to Roman!
Manolo, just to be sure: did you take the code from FLTK 1.2, as
Roman suggested? I can't really diff the new code and the FLTK 1.2
code and/or the old FLTK 1.1.4 Fl_Device code to determine it.
> Abstraction is in essence done in three steps:
> 1. Define a hierarchy of device classes
> Fl_Device
> Fl_Virtual_Printer
> Fl_GDI_Printer
> Fl_Printer (on Win)
> Fl_Quartz_Printer
> Fl_Printer (on Mac)
> Fl_PS_Printer
> Fl_Printer (on X11)
> Fl_Display
> and a new global variable fl_device that points to an instance of one of
> these classes at any time.
I have a vague *feeling* that it might be better to call the base
printer class Fl_Printer instead of Fl_Virtual_Printer, but I don't
better names as a wrapper of the derived classes. Or, wait a moment,
maybe Fl_Native_Printer ? Thus it would be:
Fl_Device
Fl_Printer
Fl_GDI_Printer
Fl_Native_Printer (on Win)
Fl_Quartz_Printer
Fl_Native_Printer (on Mac)
Fl_PS_Printer
Fl_Native_Printer (on X11)
Fl_Display
This is just for having a "simple" name for the base class to be
able to use this for code that can use the virtual base class.
But it's only a feeling, I don't know if this would be any better
in terms of better usable/readable code.
... well, I just read your newest update, and this has changed
the classes again, but you get the idea (I hope).
Albrecht
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
