On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 21:45 +0000, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Friday 04 March 2011 19:38:28, David Robillard wrote:
> > The plugin UI provides whatever widget it is natively implemented in.
> > The host requests whatever widget type it is natively implemented in.
>
> Why widget type/toolkit at all? If you want to abstract,
> why not abstract at a lower level? Make the plugin claim
> its written for a GL context or X or Win32 or Cocoa (or
> whatever is used on MacOS), and return the relevant context
> id. Make the host do the same thing. Make the library mix and
> match at that level (or libraries: it's not like a host
> is changing between X and Win32 at runtime), and gain
> toolkit independence.
That is exactly what I am describing (and have implemented).
The toolkit choice has always been entirely open-ended in the UI
extension.
-dr
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Sat Mar 5 04:15:02 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Mar 05 2011 - 04:15:02 EET