World: r3wp
[!REBOL3 GUI]
older newer | first last |
Gabriele 11-Jul-2010 [1910x2] | the actual "REBOL" :) |
(again, i can only speak for how things were in 2007 or so) | |
Henrik 11-Jul-2010 [1912] | the DLL is the closed part, I suppose. The executable contains the open parts. |
Graham 11-Jul-2010 [1913] | Ideally one should be able to load the dll into another language to use it |
Henrik 11-Jul-2010 [1914] | I think that's one of the intentions of the DLL. |
Graham 11-Jul-2010 [1915] | and one of those languages should be r2 |
Henrik 11-Jul-2010 [1916] | except it sound like R2 is not up for the job. |
Pekr 11-Jul-2010 [1917] | the single DLL can't imo work. It just contains language interpreter plus api structures on the surface imo. It means e.g. all networking code (simply code that does something), or OS dependant functions, will be in the host kit, hence I am not sure the DLL itself is much usefull separately ... |
Graham 11-Jul-2010 [1918] | the gui and parser .... |
Robert 11-Jul-2010 [1919x4] | The DLL is the plain Rebol interpreter. All the sourrindings, named host-kit, that you need to make use of Rebol on a particular platform is in the EXE. The EXE loads the DLL at init time. |
As the interpreter is plain C is should be portable to different platforms very fast. That's something that Carl always needs to do. Than all the host-kit stuff (meaning the interfaces to the Rebol interpreter) need to be ported to the target platform. | |
For example: If you can't get AGG to work, you need to do a replacement with an equal API layer. | |
Graham, I don't see a real good case to use the R3 DLL within R2. Why to do this? And the interpreter in the DLL is nothing "useful" on it's own. It requires at least a simple host environment to do something useful. | |
Graham 11-Jul-2010 [1923] | In situations where the app can not be ported to R3 yet |
Robert 11-Jul-2010 [1924] | Than stay with R2. The effort it takes to mix these two should better be spent on porting the app. |
Graham 11-Jul-2010 [1925] | Let us know when we have SSL |
Robert 11-Jul-2010 [1926] | With the host-kit SSL can be added by the community. |
BrianH 11-Jul-2010 [1927x2] | The host of the hostkit can itself be a dll, and that dll could be designed to be loaded by R2. |
Passing data between them would likely require serialization, just like with TCP, but it would be in-memory. | |
Maxim 12-Jul-2010 [1929] | yes I have a client which would benefit from R3 within R2 specificaly to use PARSE.. as brian noted, I'd compile the R3 host as a dll and try to make a routine in R2 to access it. |
Pekr 12-Jul-2010 [1930] | any news on R3 GUI front? :-) |
Henrik 12-Jul-2010 [1931] | some refinements to the resizing model, by ladislav and cyphre as well as some documentation, so I can learn how it works. no new demos at this time. |
Pekr 14-Jul-2010 [1932x2] | What is the plan towards low-level of GUI? I mean - we now have new model - host-kit. My understanding is, that Carl created only few API functions, to get it running. So - how long will it take for VID being able to work upon new host-kit architecture? |
Maybe my understanding is wrong, and all api is done already? | |
Robert 14-Jul-2010 [1934] | VID shouldn't be affected. The host-kit change with the low-level part: VID | VIew | Rebol Core | AGG | OS. We need to implement all DRAW commands yet. |
Pekr 14-Jul-2010 [1935] | From the API point-of-view, VID should not be affected, but - if you don't have all draw commands implemented yet, it can't work yet, no? |
Robert 14-Jul-2010 [1936] | Yep, that's why we need to implement them now. |
Pekr 14-Jul-2010 [1937] | OK, now I understand - I was just trying to understand, what is currently happening :-) Any ETA for the transition? 1 month, more? :-) |
Graham 14-Jul-2010 [1938x2] | so we just have some primitives again? |
This AGG stuff is pretty old ... has copyright from 2005 | |
Henrik 14-Jul-2010 [1940] | transition shouldn't affect GUI development. it's not like all copies of A97 stopped working. :-) |
Graham 14-Jul-2010 [1941x2] | AGG 2.4 has the BSD license and 2.5 ( seems work stopped in 2007 or before ) has the GPL license. |
So, I guess we're stuck with 2.4 unless we can find something else | |
Pekr 14-Jul-2010 [1943] | Graham - we use AGG 2.4, because with 2.5, Max changed license to GPL. But Cyphe said, that there is not much new in 2.5. AGG is a dead-end anyway - it is not further developed by original author (Max Shemanarev) imo, but still good. |
Graham 14-Jul-2010 [1944x2] | So, what are the alternatives? |
OpenGL | |
Pekr 14-Jul-2010 [1946] | no, Cairo ... but AGG is still better than Cairo, so why to worry? And even if Max does not develop it further, maybe AGG community will come with some other improvements ... |
Steeve 14-Jul-2010 [1947] | We can enhance agg ourself, I guess. |
Henrik 14-Jul-2010 [1948] | so far we're not even taking 100% advantage of AGG, so there's a bit of juice left in it. |
Steeve 14-Jul-2010 [1949] | Yep, there are some interesting methods, like bounding_rect or so (to calculate the bounding coords of a shape) |
Graham 14-Jul-2010 [1950x2] | rather than enhance AGG 2.4 .. why not move to OpenGL ? |
We then get access to all the 3D stuff and physics models | |
Henrik 14-Jul-2010 [1952x2] | I'm not sure openGL can cover what AGG does and vice versa. |
so both are in a way relevant | |
Steeve 14-Jul-2010 [1954x2] | Henrik, something really interesting would be a method to get back all the constructed vertices (after transformations). As a shape block. |
Don't know if I'm clear | |
Graham 14-Jul-2010 [1956] | I see AmigaOS4.1 uses cairo |
Henrik 14-Jul-2010 [1957x2] | Graham, yes, since Hyperion are so insistant on making AmigaOS look like any other linux that is of course what they would use. |
Steeve, Cyphre probably understands that better than me, but I assume this means some level of hardware acceleration possibility of DRAW transformations. :-) | |
Graham 14-Jul-2010 [1959] | I see Cairo has both PS and PDF as output targets ... which sounds really good to me! |
older newer | first last |