On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 15:46:34 +0300, Tomas Hajny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi Tomas,
Hi Evgeniy,
I'd say that having Graph built on top of SDL would be quite useful. I
agree with Daniel that implementation in Pascal would be much better
choice - among others, one could use it on various platforms without
having to compile C libraries on those platforms (SDL is available on
quite a few of them). I believe that Daniel intended to rewrite Graph to
use a "driver" system (similarly to what we use for threading,
keyboard/video/mouse units, heap management etc.), which would allow
people to use the same Graph functionalities supported by different
back-ends and choose either at compile time or possibly even at run time
which back-end should be used (as an example, svgalib could be used as
backup option for systems not running X11, etc.).
I personally wouldn't necessarily wait for PTCPas based implementation -
if Daniel wants to use the driver system, it should be enough to agree on
the driver interface, anything else can be done completely independently.
As far as I've understood Daniel is working only on driver system, isn't
it? He doesn't touch such things like line and circle for example (It
should be based on PutPixel as I thing) but he is implementing only the
things that using back-end libs (like PTCPas), in my example such thing is
PutPixel. Am I right?
If you implement Graph as a completely independent implementation, you
could add it to contributed units (see our WWW pages), so anybody else
can
use it.
If you do it using the driver system and want to contribute this work to
FPC, I can imagine it could even become part of our SVN repository and
future official FPC releases under some conditions (however, this last
sentence is my personal view, not necessarily shared by the whole FPC
core
team).
Tomas
It would be great for me to realize a small small part of FPC. And I find
that it is much more useful to build a piece for something than create own
little project.
I will do it using driver system with pleasure, but you've written that it
is only your own opinion.
And there are several questions about libraries and programme languages.
I agree that the most part must be in pascal, but I think that such things
like SDL initialization, loading images need to be implemented in C (if
use native SDL headers). From my point of view usage of C parts is less
dangerous then usage converters and other wrappers stuff. I have no
experience with JEDI_SDL, but the last release was 2 years ago... And it's
only the headers, so it uses "native" SDL libraries.
I'm just beginner in software development so, please, be patient.
--
Best regards
E.I.
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
