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]