Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 110

Thread: Cairo Proposed To Become Part Of ISO C++

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    All the more reason Cairo devs should shoot it down.
    Even if they could (which the license they use doesn't allow), why would they shoot it down?

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ancurio View Post
    Are you implying that because of the other added features, "window creation and event management" have suffered in quality under SDL? Because right now there is not a single cross platform library available that can even claim feature parity with SDL2. If you don't like the fact that SDL2 has a render abstraction, you can just compile it out.
    I'm saying a project with limited resources should focus on a limited scope rather than trying to replace any other third party library. A team or company should not forget who their target is, and stay focused on creating a solid product for a certain market/demand. Doing display and event management across all the target platforms is a massive task by itself.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,788

    Default

    If there's a threading API in the standard library (and there is), there's no reason not to have a drawing API too. Or a networking one (which is already in Boost and the plan I believe is to move it into the standard library at some point.) It's not like they're adding this into the language; they're adding it into the standard library.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Talking about standard library, I believe most compiler manufacturers should put a bit of work on modularizing their implementations. I wrote a small patcher in C++, and while the Linux version takes a few KBs (less than 40, IIRC), the Windows version needs to either ship with a ~500-600KB dll or take ~600KB if linked statically, while I only used vectors from the standard library (and a limited subset of its functionality, as the program is really simple).

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    Surprisingly to me at least is that openvg has very little to no hardware adoption. The implementations that exist are apparently software.I read about this on the fxos mailing lists FYI.
    IOW, it's dead Jim.
    are you sure?
    http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic....set.graphics/
    http://www.imgtec.com/news/Release/index.asp?NewsID=441
    http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/...p?code=i.MX356
    https://developer.qualcomm.com/disco...ems/adreno-gpu
    http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-superchip.html
    http://www.vivantecorp.com/en/techno...-graphics.html

    i read openvg support on all those sites..
    yes they're mostly embedded solutions, and yes OpenVG is mostly an api used in embedded (mobile), for now at least
    but that is due to the need for a portable, hw - and os-independent accelerated 2d api being *mostly* felt there (since as far as the pc is concerned Windows already has Direct2D and Mac OSX has CoreGraphics, while linux apparently is fine with unaccelerated Cairo...) and doesnt deny it being one such api

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    If there's a threading API in the standard library (and there is), there's no reason not to have a drawing API too. Or a networking one (which is already in Boost and the plan I believe is to move it into the standard library at some point.) It's not like they're adding this into the language; they're adding it into the standard library.
    The difference is, there's only one way to do threads on any given platform. The threading APIs for Windows, Posix, etc have been stable for decades. They are the perfect target for standardization.

    Drawing, even 2d drawing, is not so simple. Algorithms in this field are constantly evolving. We've moved from software rendering to increasingly programmable hardware (vertex/fragment shaders -> geometry shaders -> hull/domain shaders -> compute), we've moved from 8bit palettes to 16/32bit colors then 64/128bit floating-point formats (for complex effects, HDR), we've moved from bitmap text to path rendering, we've added antialiasing, subpixel antialiasing, kerning, hinting, ligatures.

    Cairo is a good library, but it is already dated. In ten years, any standard based on that will look like the X11 rendering routines look today: pretty much useless.

    It just looks like a huge amount of effort for something people are not going to use in the end...

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    267

    Default

    Whoever decided Cairo was a good idea is a complete idiot, Cairo is slow and its Path Implementation is a broken mess. WTF is wrong with these people?

    1. Nvidia Path Rendering (Is the Best in the Industry)
    2. OpenVG (Not as fast as NVPath but its Path Rendering Implementation is just as good)
    3. Anti-Grain Geometry (Software Based, No Hardware Acceleration but its Path Rendering Implementation is just as good)

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    You see, if POSIX would be included into ISO
    why not win32 instead of posix ? see, how useless your suggestion is

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    Cairo is a good library, but it is already dated. In ten years, any standard based on that will look like the X11 rendering routines look today: pretty much useless.

    It just looks like a huge amount of effort for something people are not going to use in the end...
    even if you are right, in ten years api can be extended/improved
    while you instead proposing to do nothing at all and use iostreams for ui - clearly better, isn't it ?

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zester View Post
    Whoever decided Cairo was a good idea is a complete idiot, Cairo is slow and its Path Implementation is a broken mess. WTF is wrong with these people?
    whoever doesn't understand that standard describes only interface and not implementation, is a complete idiot

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •