Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] more fundamental questions
From: Paul Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: Tue May 22 2001 - 20:27:40 EEST
>It seems to me that to focus on implementation before to have defined an
>external design and to have made the needed political choices is rather
>sick and IMHO a waste of time.
Let me give you an example that might show why I don't think its the
wrong order, sometimes.
In our extensive discussions about GUI's for LADSPA plugins, there is
the natural solution: plugin writers create a GUI using any toolkit
they want, and it works. There is really no doubt that this is how it
should be.
The problem is that it will never(1) work. We've established that
quite firmly. The reasons why concern the low level details of how
modern X Window toolkits work, the details of Xlib's multithreading
capabilities and the nature of the toolkit event loops. So, any design
that ignores these kinds of details destined for failure.
Its one thing to describe what we want, and its something else to
describe a design that we can actually implement. Many of my questions
seek to ensure that we're coming up with a design that can be
implemented.
--p
(1) yes, there are some emerging hacks that enable Qt event loops to
drive GTK widgets. they might be useful, eventually, but i think
it more likely that people in the toolkit development groups will
eventually realize the need to get their stuff working together
without the kinds of hacks that these require. but i doubt that
this will happen for at least a couple of years.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue May 22 2001 - 20:56:46 EEST