[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       freedesktop-xorg
Subject:    Re: Directfb Xorg server
From:       "Mike Emmel" <mike.emmel () gmail ! com>
Date:       2006-05-31 18:56:03
Message-ID: 3e9035250605311156y74bfd3c5rea8a4c570d44bff0 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 5/31/06, Adam Jackson <ajax@nwnk.net> wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 May 2006 12:04, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> > Okay, now lets start to nail it down!
> >
> > My roadmap suggestion:
> >
> > 1. introduce an DDX_CALLBACK structure and register_ddx_callback()
> > 2. rename DIX' main() into dix_main() and add some main() to
> >    each DDX which just calls register_ddx_callback() and dix_main().
> > 3. register_ddx_callback() initializes all fields with default
> >    values and checks whether those callbacks are defined, which
> >    *must* be implemented by the DDX (aka have no default).
> > 4. sucessively add DDX functions to the callback structure,
> >    let register_ddx_callback() init them and rename them,
> >    change all calling functions to use the DDX_CALLBACK structure
> >    instead.
> > 5. sucessively move these functions completely to the DDX.
>
> The main/dix_main split is probably sensible.  Everything else you describe
> can already be done with wrapping so I fail to see the point.
>
Splitting out the protocol cannot be done with wrapping.
Wrapping adds a lot of complexity to the code the approach eliminates
the need for wrapping. Wrapping is a implementation detail or should be.
With some changes the ddx layer can choose how it want to implement the server.
In the rootless case you can pretty much dispatch directly to the
native implementation.

Choice is a good thing tm.

Mike

> - ajax
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xorg mailing list
> xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
>
>
>

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]