Index: [thread] [date] [subject] [author]
  From: Adrian Ratnapala <s369625@student.uq.edu.au>
  To  : ggi-develop@eskimo.com
  Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 11:40:06 +1000 (GMT+1000)

Re: 3d

On Tue, 18 Aug 1998, Jon M. Taylor wrote:

> 	The point is that you either deal with hardware specific features
> by encapsulating them in a higher-level API, or you hit the KGI driver
> directly.  But you should not have "variable APIs".  If a given API lacks
> support for a given feature, either extend it for good or bypass it
> altogether.  Since everything is so mix 'n match in LibGGI anyway, it
> doesn't make sense to have extensible APIs.  An extensible API *system*,
> yes.  But the APIs themselves should be standardized.
Agreed.  (Unless you want to excapsulate the KGI API in a thin portability
layer, or is that just silt).

Index: [thread] [date] [subject] [author]