Re: [E-devel] {Spam?} Re: evas common engine as a direct rendering library?

[Vincent T. <vt...@un...>]

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:20:16 +0200 "Jorge Luis Zapata Muga"
> <jor...@gm...> babbled:
>
>> Hi all, i have taken evas to be my guinea pig here =)
>>
>> I've split the common engine code into a different library, because
>> with time it has became a really good direct rendering library. what
>> would it benefit us? i have the idea that abstracting at the canvas
>> level and at the rendering level would make objects to render
>> themselves, and get away from engine level several non needed stuff
>> because there's maybe no engine that can do what evas do internally.
>> the latter isnt fully decided yet, but isolating concepts on the
>> library is a good thing imho, you can do more benchmarks and have more
>> control on what every part of the library does. So the first step im
>> doing is to abstract the direct rendering code, if anyone is
>> interested on this, reply :)
>
> I think this is a good idea. I have nothing against it - but we need to be
> aware that it makes breaking internal rendering api's harder :( i do agree that
> this will make benchmarks and testing of just raw routines much much much
> easier. for now i think this extra lib can just ship with evas - we can split
> it out later as/when needed. for now a big sign of "this api is going to break
> - don't use it in your app unless you like api's always breaking" on it. :)

again, a branch in cvs can be a good idea to test that.

Vincent