[cp-patches] Re: Proposal: Graphics2D rewrite branch
Am Donnerstag, den 08.12.2005, 13:20 + schrieb theUser BL: > >On this branch I'd like to do several things: > > > >1) Make Graphics2D the default > >2) Remove Graphics > > What do you mean with this? > Does this mean, that Graphics is based on Graphics2D and so for plain AWT or > Swing programs Cairo is needed? > > I don't hope so. I have the hope, that it goes in any time the other way > around, that Graphics2D is based on Graphics and created with the plain > AWT-Graphics. This would indeed be cool to have, though I doubt this is what fitzsim is going to do. As in other areas of Classpath it would be nice to have a Java-only (easily portable) variant and a version that is backed by some native lib. What I don't understand, why do we need a new branch here? The build-time and runtime-switches seem sufficient to me for now. And when the impl is somewhat complete, these switches could be easily changed to make Graphics2D the default. /Roman signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ Classpath-patches mailing list Classpath-patches@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches
Re: [cp-patches] Re: Proposal: Graphics2D rewrite branch
On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 18:01 +0100, Roman Kennke wrote: > What I don't understand, why do we need a new branch here? The > build-time and runtime-switches seem sufficient to me for now. And when > the impl is somewhat complete, these switches could be easily changed to > make Graphics2D the default. I was wondering the same thing. We used to branch libgcj for advanced GUI hacking, but I think that was because people were sensitive to breaking the GCC builds. But now we're just talking about the GNU Classpath repository, where people will likely be more tolerant of breakage (not that it happened much in our libgcj branch). I guess I don't care much either way. Just curious. AG ___ Classpath-patches mailing list Classpath-patches@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches
Re: [cp-patches] Re: Proposal: Graphics2D rewrite branch
On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 18:01 +0100, Roman Kennke wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 08.12.2005, 13:20 + schrieb theUser BL: > > >On this branch I'd like to do several things: > > > > > >1) Make Graphics2D the default > > >2) Remove Graphics > > > > What do you mean with this? > > Does this mean, that Graphics is based on Graphics2D and so for plain AWT > > or > > Swing programs Cairo is needed? > > > > I don't hope so. I have the hope, that it goes in any time the other way > > around, that Graphics2D is based on Graphics and created with the plain > > AWT-Graphics. > > This would indeed be cool to have, though I doubt this is what fitzsim > is going to do. As in other areas of Classpath it would be nice to have > a Java-only (easily portable) variant and a version that is backed by > some native lib. > > What I don't understand, why do we need a new branch here? The > build-time and runtime-switches seem sufficient to me for now. And when > the impl is somewhat complete, these switches could be easily changed to > make Graphics2D the default. I just don't want to disrupt the progress of Swing and I don't want to do all the work on my local machine either. A branch seemed like a good trade-off. The changes I'll be making will likely be pretty invasive. I'm not sure at this point that --disable-gtk-cairo will be enough insulation so I thought a branch was safer. It would also allow me to make bigger/riskier changes that may not even build after a check-in (a freedom that I like to have when doing rewrites like this). All that said, I could try just working on mainline if people would rather that and could put up with some transient breakage. Tom ___ Classpath-patches mailing list Classpath-patches@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches
