Re: a wishlist [Re: getting things moving]

  • From: Richard C Bilson <rcbilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: tor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, wilyfans@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 13:14:58 -0400

> From: Tor <tor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> I have not used the plan9 graphics library, but from what I've seen of
> the API it is designed around the assumption that all graphics
> operations are non-local. This is a bit problematic when dealing with fonts
> and bitmap images, should we emulate a client-server solution and still do
> everything locally, basically embedding a graphics server?

By "non-local" I assume you mean wily running on one computer and
displaying on another.  If you're not going to assume that graphic
operations are "non-local", what are you going to assume?  That wily is
always running on a local display?  Or are you suggesting a different
set of code for each case?

Let me just say, as a data point, that most of my uses of wily are in
"non-local" mode.  Typically these are on fast computers over fast
networks, but even so I'm not thrilled at the prospect of my editor
becoming less responsive for the sake of a facelift.

> Anyway, the API would be fairly small. Here's a quick draft of what
> I was thinking of:

Designing an API is like choosing a spouse: do it wrong and you'll make
your life miserable, and there's a whole lot of pain standing between
you and another chance.  Nothing against your API, for sure -- in fact,
it's exactly what I would come up with if I were doing it.  But I find
it's usually better to build on established work rather than roll your
own.  9's libdraw has the advantage of many years of development by a
few smart people.

- Richard

Other related posts: