Re: [fltk.development] Old FLTK2/Cairo poll Was: Re: Doublebuffering issues and general thoughtsfrom a frustrated long time FLTK user.

2012-04-06 Thread Ian MacArthur
On 6 Apr 2012, at 03:41, Greg Ercolano wrote: > If cmake were something we could include in the FLTK package, >I'd be for it. Is it a pretty tight tool? I was under the (probably mistaken) impression that it might be possible to use cmake like we use autotools, i.e. the packager runs it whe

Re: [fltk.development] Old FLTK2/Cairo poll Was: Re: Doublebuffering issues and general thoughtsfrom a frustrated long time FLTK user.

2012-04-06 Thread Matthias Melcher
FLTK3 has a feature in Fluod that generates all required IDE and make files for all platforms. It will evetually generate and manage FLTK project files for the users. It also generazes cmake files. This is great when you are on OS X for example and need to add a source file to FLTK. No need to

Re: [fltk.development] Old FLTK2/Cairo poll Was: Re: Doublebuffering issues and general thoughtsfrom a frustrated long time FLTK user.

2012-04-05 Thread Greg Ercolano
On 04/05/12 16:26, Fabien Costantini wrote: > Today, I would vote for removing the visual studio 2xxx ide projects and > stick with cmake. I'd like to use cmake, but it's distressing that it isn't native to any of the OS's we support. ('Command not found' on OSX/Lion, Linu

Re: [fltk.development] Old FLTK2/Cairo poll Was: Re: Doublebuffering issues and general thoughtsfrom a frustrated long time FLTK user.

2012-04-05 Thread Fabien Costantini
> I suggest to add Cairo support as an optional library. This allows for the > end user to decide if he wants Cairo or not for any available FLTK app. +1 BTW, it looks like the VS2008 ide projects are defining HAVE_CAIRO thus failing to build by default. Note that because the (originally in confi

Re: [fltk.development] Old FLTK2/Cairo poll Was: Re: Doublebuffering issues and general thoughtsfrom a frustrated long time FLTK user.

2012-04-04 Thread MacArthur, Ian (SELEX GALILEO, UK)
> Cairo support on 1 was quite limited. On 2 it was better, but never > complete IIRC. Sinc 1.3/3.0 we have a driver system for rendering which > means that any frontend can be added to FLTK in a somewhat ordeely > fashion. I suggest to add Cairo support as an optional library. This > allows for t

Re: [fltk.development] Old FLTK2/Cairo poll Was: Re: Doublebuffering issues and general thoughtsfrom a frustrated long time FLTK user.

2012-04-04 Thread Matthias Melcher
Cairo support on 1 was quite limited. On 2 it was better, but never complete IIRC. Sinc 1.3/3.0 we have a driver system for rendering which means that any frontend can be added to FLTK in a somewhat ordeely fashion. I suggest to add Cairo support as an optional library. This allows for the end u

[fltk.development] Old FLTK2/Cairo poll Was: Re: Doublebuffering issues and general thoughtsfrom a frustrated long time FLTK user.

2012-03-23 Thread Duncan Gibson
>>> When was this? I seem to recall Bill was looking at Cairo >>> rendering for some of the fltk-2 experiments, but that must be >>> many years ago now. I can't imagine he's looked at that recently >>> though. If he did anything, it'll be in the fltk-2 svn, ... >> Argh! Indeed! There it is, righ