Re: [Emutos-devel] GEM RSC data

[Standa O. <opi...@se...>]

On Thu, 4 Jul 2002, Thomas Huth wrote:

> >Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 19:40:16 +0200
> >From: mdo...@mu...
> >
> >
> >Didn't we have a clean RSC file? So DO we want to use an RCS? Why not code
> >it on Aranym, where it is our platform of the future? This is no joke. Why
> >not switch over development to Atari/Aranym platform? This would be a real
> >good stress test for it, right?
> 
> Sure, there is are real RSC files for the PC-GEM + DESKTOP. The DESKTOP.RSC
> is even in the CVS repository, however, it seems so that I once forgot to
> upload GEM.RSC, too. If you need it, just tell me.
> But I am still not convinced yet about maintaining a separate RSC file:
> 1) Since RSCs are binary files, they will not work right with CVS (when
>    two people change it at the same moment, you're in trouble!).

This is true. This is why Frank Naumann and me have agreed to create (or 
steal) GUI definition XML format. Recently I think about XUL as a good base.
The RSC-Designer should be able to load/save/import XUL format and convert 
it into RSC and vice versa.

> 2) What RSC editor should be used? Most RSC editors are commercial products
>    - and we once agreed not to use commercial software. Some others are
>    Shareware (ORCS, RSM 2.x), but aren't maintained any more. Or even the
>    old Atari RCS?? No, that's not really usable. And RSC-Designer seems not
>    to be available yet.

Yes, it is not. It can load/save the RSC and extract/import texts from it. 
It has no editting features so far. But this should slightly change. 
Anyway the XUL (maybe some extension of it to keep all the RSC features) 
load/save should not be that complicated to implement. I would concentrate 
on this if you like.

> 3) It will take much more memory in the ROM image - especially when you have
>    to use several RSCs for i18n.

This is true. The image should include the generated C structures instead 
of the .RSCs for sure.

> You currently need the GEM-RSC for the file-selector dialog and for
> form_alert for example.
> 
> So what shall we do now? Extra RSC files or RSCs in C files? I'd prefer the
> C files...

Maybe the XUL definitions?

regards

STan