Patrik Stridvall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sure but the point is that there are one kind of drivers that
> do nothing (metafile) and one kind that do software conversions.
>
> That _is_ the fundamental difference.
That's a completely artificial distinction. You may just as well say
that some drivers use Xlib and some don't, so that we need two
different interfaces. The whole point of the driver interface is that
it is generic: all drivers can be implemented based on the same
interface, and that is a *good* thing. Yes there is some code
duplication when two drivers do similar things; that's not a
problem. If the shared code gets large it can be moved to a common
function, but it doesn't have to be part of the interface.
> You haven't really said why except for pointing out some potential
> problem that have obvious solutions.
>
> I think this is the main point of our disagreement.
> However I can't argue against "I strongly disagree with"
> without good explaination.
If you don't agree that adding new artificial interfaces and strange
naming conventions makes the code less maintainable I'm afraid I can't
explain much more. You'll just have to take my word for it ;-)
> I ask again:
> How are you going to support world transform
> which uses float without having normal application
> paying the price of this? Specifially be able
> to run without FPU.
>
> Are you going to bloat the X11 driver with that code?
> It will probably look really nice and cosy. NOT!
You put that in LPtoDP and friends, which the drivers then use as they
need it. No code duplication, and no new complicated interface. If you
absolutely want a jump table you can put one in there, so that LPtoDP
branches to different functions depending on the current transform and
we don't do the floating point stuff when not needed.
--
Alexandre Julliard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
