On 05/29/2009 11:14 AM, Austin English wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:10 AM, chris ahrendt<celtich...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Question on this debate: >> >> Has AJ documented anywhere what the architectural issues are so they can >> be addressed? >> I have not seen this in the thread and was just wondering. >> If we have them documented then its a relatively easy task to address >> each of them. >> Yes it may be a hack but you would be surprised at how much of Windows >> is a hack internally. >> >> Do we even have an architectural document or guidelines to reference? >> > If you read the entire thread, you'll see that the DIB design is not a > puzzle that can be carved out and dropped in. The DIB engine must be > designed from scratch. Designing the DIB architecture is half of the > work itself, since that involves planning a lot of the code/testing, > etc. > > He pointed out a few things he didn't like about Massimo's design, but > not a full 'here's the spec, do this exactly'. > > For more details, read the full thread and past discussions. > > -- > -Austin > > > Right Austin, I have... thats why I asked the question why not sit down and say here is what we want from the DIB engine here is the Spec do this .. I have seen the here is what I don't like. But nothing showing what exactly is needed. This would be the first step in resolving this circular argument / discussion which is what I am trying to facilitate =D. Until that is done all we can do is have this same circular argument / discussion =D
chris