From: Lisias Toledo ([email protected])
Date: Sat Apr 20 2002 - 05:07:54 CEST
Michele Andreoli wrote:
> Microwindows is a new API, i.e.: function are different from Xlib.
> I explored a little Microwindows and Nano-X, but they implement new APIs.
> I dislike this proliferation!
I remember a article Somewhere in the Time 8-) where the guy tries to
explain why Xlib isn't good for low footprint memory situations. I must
be honest, at time, I didn't understood half that writing... 8-)
There's a lot of people willing a alternative to X, as the Berlin
Project. I think the embedded environment is suffering the same
X-fobia...
> GTK+ is even worst, because it is a new API the call the Xlib API.
> Therefore, GTK+ requires an X-Window server in order to work.
To not mentio the huge footprint.
> As you see, I simply removed the X Protocol, reducing X-Window
> from a "graphics network server" to Microsoft Windows! Is that the answer?
I think it's one of possible answers. How good is a graphics network
server on a mono-user, mono-task enviromnent as a PDA?
> But now we have the program that speak Xlib with the module; the
> module that speak Qt with Qt; and Qt that speak framebuffer with
> the the kernel: this is Babilonia!
To not mention the abstraction cascade impairing performance and wasting
memory...
-- []s, (Pink@Manaus.Amazon.Brazil.America.Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Universe) Quote of month: Liberdade não é um esforço individual. A sua só existe se vc garantir a dos outros! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Sat Feb 08 2003 - 15:27:22 CET