Micah Dowty wrote:
That would be nice, but one of PicoGUI's strengths has always
been very flexible compile-time configuration. That would turn
into a big mess with makefiles only.
E.g. the Retawq webbrowser and the lwIP networking stack have
extraordinary flexible compile-time configurations a
Neundorf, Alexander wrote:
-the build system
That definitely needs work- I started a replacement based on SCons,
but that never got off the ground.
I think that's the wrong direction.
It needs a simple build system. Not simple as in "it does everything automatically", but simple as in "
Micah Dowty wrote:
I think the biggest problem was just motivation in general. It's hard to
get excited about a GUI that doesn't already do everything you want it to...
I think this interpretation is only right for the unixish targets, and
therefore misses my point. In the unixish world you _ha
Alexander Neundorf wrote:
[snip]
What I'd like to have/do would be=20
-more abstraction of the OS
-rewrite the API
Currently there is no open source widget toolkit available for deeply =
embedded systems, i.e. which are not running linux (but e.g. ecos, =
ecos.sourceware.org).=20
The only one which
Micah wrote:
With the recent traffic on this list, I've become curious.
What is PicoGUI being used for these days?
I only watch, just in case someone more capable than me introduces
abstraction from Unixish dependencies. I'd use it as display for motor
controllers, and probably also to provid
h more active developers if
architecture independence was a design goal, just like lwIP in the
networking area.
All the best
Peter
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:02:03AM +0100, Peter Graf wrote:
Micah wrote:
Well, it's not the bugs that disappoint me, it's the lack of forethought
Micah wrote:
Well, it's not the bugs that disappoint me, it's the lack of forethought
I had when putting together PicoGUI's architecture. The biggest thing that
bothers me still is how it does clipping of 2D primitives. PicoGUI was a great
learning experience for me, but I'm a little surprised peo
At 09:39 02.04.03 +0200, Pascal Bauermeister wrote:
[snip]
Finally, PG2 targets also embedded devices, not only with linux. Some
processor may not have a C++ compiler...
Pascal
Indeed. For the 68k machine+OS combination I (hope to) port it to, there is
no C++ Compiler.
All the best
Peter
Hi Martin,
Peter, please see this as a "power" and not as a shortcoming. Also see,
how happy many people still are with character mode applications. This
power does not come from the restriction to characters, it comes from the
the way how simple and clear they are to use.
It wasn't at all my
Hi Micah,
> The graphics hardware is simple highcolor, linear memory mapped,
> non-accelerated,
> but has about 30 MBytes/sec bandwidth. It actually can run Linux+X at
> usable speed,
> so it should be ideal for PicoGUI+framebuffer with the native small OS.
Hmm.. out of curiosity, what resolutio
Hi Micah,
many thanks for your very informative reply.
> I'm evaluating which GUI to port to a non-unixstyle multitasking OS with
> limited posix lib support. Although the CPU performance is more like
> "embedded", the use is a highresolution desktop rather than a small
display.
If you're usin
Hi folks,
I'm evaluating which GUI to port to a non-unixstyle multitasking OS with
limited posix lib support. Although the CPU performance is more like
"embedded", the use is a highresolution desktop rather than a small display.
Framebuffer implementation seems feasible, but the PDA-style
windo
12 matches
Mail list logo
