On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Andre Ulrich wrote:
> there is a discussion about DirectFB on Slashdot. Maybe this is a good
> chance to promote GGI a little bit and make people aware of its features.
I posted something I felt appropriate just now under
"GGI Perspective: clean code is good code."
I hope it gets modded up. I figured since we plan to keep
friendly relationships with the DirectFB project, it was best to
be constructive and not just barge in and plug away :-)
This is the text I posted FWIW:
Normally I would be one of the ones saying "Ugh, not another half-ass
graphics standard," as I am developer for the GGI Project, which, if
very slowly, is creating the ultimate (IOO) cross-platform and
cross-display-system graphics API/library. I make no such complaints
about DirectFB (well, OK, I do complain about their input system :-)
and here is why: DirectFB is coded in such a way that it contains
easily reusable, easily understandable graphics driver code. Both
DirectFB and X have unique content -- there aren't that many
implementations of hardware level blitting/overlay libraries
available. Unlike X, DirectFB is modular and developer-friendly. In
fact so much so that the current version of LibGGI can use DirectFB's
binary graphics driver modules.
--
Brian
