On Mon, 17 May 2010, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 05/17/2010 03:20 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > On 05/16/10 03:10, Paul Brook wrote: > > > > The other solution would be to use the DirectFB driver for SDL which > > > > would allow to do slightly the same as this patch. But that would mean > > > > having to deal with an additional layer in the graphical stack, which is > > > > not exactly what one wants from a performance or a complexity point of > > > > view. > > > > > > I don't buy your complexity argument. Doesn't DirectFB-via-SDL already > > > work? > > > > Run a guest. Switch to another (host) virtual terminal. Watch qemu > > continue drawing on the framebuffer. Doesn't count as "working" in my book. > > A common theme with SDL seems to be that it does lots of things poorly. I > wonder if we'd be better suited just dropping SDL and focusing on doing a few > things well.
There's one thing that SDL does marvelously well - it's just one fairly small and self contained library that doesn't unleash dependency hell on the user. > The fact that we have cocoa support in the tree is basically an admission of > failure with SDL. I don't think so, the way i see it: someone had an itch (i.e. an application that does not integrate well with his windowing environment) and he scratched it. -- mailto:av1...@comtv.ru