Hi all, let me add my $ 0.02 here.
On Jan 8 2017, Andrew Robinson wrote: >Hi Eric, > > IUP is extremely healthy the way it is now, so protecting IUP's health is > the more important of all things to consider. > .... > Talking about the different specific event loops is like talking about > apples and oranges. I do NOT share your hard feelings towards the proposal. Without knowing enough of the IUP internals to judge how hard it would be to actually implement it, I had the impression that the proposal was well thought out and would broaden the applicability of IUP. And at least IMHO it looks as if there is little actual damage done. I myself learned already before to work AROUND the limitation of IUP expecting to assume control of the event loop of the application. And that is for a pure C+Linux application (which assumes to mostly sit in poll(2) and revolves around invoking callbacks when data is available). I wonder how many people ran into those issues too. Furthermore I'd also welcome IUP support for iOS or Android. Though I'd agree with Andrew: if that came at the cost of becoming a non-maintainable bloatware, I'd rather choose the path of simplicity. Best /Jörg ...... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Iup-users mailing list Iup-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/iup-users
