>> That's exactly how fltk-2 started in the first place... > [...] With the separate library design philosophy in FLTK1, I was > always surpised that FLTK2 wasn't just an alternate API library to > a common base. It seems like that would have been a lot easier to > maintain.
Last year(?), during the discussions about 1.3.x and beyond, someone suggested abstracting out a common library of low-level functions that would then sit below both FLTK1 and FLTK2. This was just to streamline developer effort and reduce the overall code base. It could also be a means to start pulling the two developments together over time, ... but as there are only a few active developers for FLTK1 and even fewer for FLTK2 it's all a bit pie-in-the-sky :-( D. _______________________________________________ fltk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
