On 7 July 2014 05:18, Thomas Martitz <ku...@rockbox.org> wrote: > Am 05.07.2014 10:30, schrieb Jonathan Gordon: > > What you are proposing to add is the exact opposite what we did a few > years back, when we all happily agreed that the offset-approach is better > for the skin engine. Please clear me up on why you want to reverse that > choice. > > This is factually incorrect. *I* switched to the offset scheme so the skin engine's buffer could be moved into a buflib handle instead of the statically allocated buffer which was wasteful. Offsets were the only sensible option at the time because we were still learning how to use buflib correctly.
> Best regards. >
