[Pharo-project] cairo support
Hi all should we push rome or the cairo graphics package? I kno wthat they are not at the same level of abstarction but I prefer to ask. Or should rome be based on the cairo graphics package? Stef
I would choose the lower level of abstraction - cairo. Did there exists an portable OpenVG implementation? This would be too a possible alternative to wrap with Alien. Marco Schmidt PS: Path-based drawing rules! Postscript rules! 2009/9/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
Hi all
should we push rome or the cairo graphics package? I kno wthat they are not at the same level of abstarction but I prefer to ask. Or should rome be based on the cairo graphics package?
Stef
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
2009/9/25 Marco Schmidt <Marco.Schmidt@taugamma.de>:
I would choose the lower level of abstraction - cairo. Did there exists an portable OpenVG implementation? This would be too a possible alternative to wrap with Alien.
Yes, it would be cool to have portable OpenVG implementation, because the plugin i made ready to work with it. But afaik there is no such implementation yet. ShivaVG is using OpenGL, which makes it well portable on all major platforms. Alas, its not fully covers the 1.0 spec, and its not very fast :( P.S. Same as you, i'm not in favor for being dependant on higher-level libraries such as cairo or rome. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
ask igor he got something :) On Sep 25, 2009, at 10:15 PM, Marco Schmidt wrote:
I would choose the lower level of abstraction - cairo. Did there exists an portable OpenVG implementation? This would be too a possible alternative to wrap with Alien.
Marco Schmidt
PS: Path-based drawing rules! Postscript rules!
2009/9/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
Hi all
should we push rome or the cairo graphics package? I kno wthat they are not at the same level of abstarction but I prefer to ask. Or should rome be based on the cairo graphics package?
Stef
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
You can read brief description at wiki page on http://www.squeaksource.com/OpenVG 2009/9/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
ask igor he got something :)
On Sep 25, 2009, at 10:15 PM, Marco Schmidt wrote:
I would choose the lower level of abstraction - cairo. Did there exists an portable OpenVG implementation? This would be too a possible alternative to wrap with Alien.
Marco Schmidt
PS: Path-based drawing rules! Postscript rules!
2009/9/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
Hi all
should we push rome or the cairo graphics package? I kno wthat they are not at the same level of abstarction but I prefer to ask. Or should rome be based on the cairo graphics package?
Stef
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
should we push rome or the cairo graphics package? I kno wthat they are not at the same level of abstarction but I prefer to ask. Or should rome be based on the cairo graphics package?
I'm in favor of pushing the CairoGraphics package and porting Rome to it. -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them popular by not having them." James Iry
ok cool! On Sep 27, 2009, at 9:49 AM, Damien Cassou wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
should we push rome or the cairo graphics package? I kno wthat they are not at the same level of abstarction but I prefer to ask. Or should rome be based on the cairo graphics package?
I'm in favor of pushing the CairoGraphics package and porting Rome to it.
-- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st
"Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them popular by not having them." James Iry
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Damien Cassou wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
should we push rome or the cairo graphics package? I kno wthat they are not at the same level of abstarction but I prefer to ask. Or should rome be based on the cairo graphics package?
I'm in favor of pushing the CairoGraphics package and porting Rome to it.
You should really first understand what Rome is. First: Rome is not complete and far from perfect in its current state. Second: Rome is a graphics context/canvas level abstraction of vector graphics, with subclasses supplying implementations for different backends. This way the same client code would work on Cairo, OpenVG, but also simple BitBlt (with some less quality). Just look at the current subclasses of RomeCanvas. If we "only" support cairo graphics we give up that freedom and applications would need to implement the portability layer for different backends. Rome is also already a relatively low level abstraction. Michael
Michael Rueger wrote:
I'm in favor of pushing the CairoGraphics package and porting Rome to it.
Despite (or on top of? ;-) ) my arguments in the previous mail that would be the way to go either way :-) My argument basically is that we should avoid "trapping" people into the Cairo back-end. It is neither perfect nor the best for every application. Michael
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Michael Rueger <m.rueger@acm.org> wrote:
Michael Rueger wrote:
I'm in favor of pushing the CairoGraphics package and porting Rome to it.
Despite (or on top of? ;-) ) my arguments in the previous mail that would be the way to go either way :-)
My argument basically is that we should avoid "trapping" people into the Cairo back-end. It is neither perfect nor the best for every application.
Ok, we have to keep the possibility to change the backend. However, for the Cairo backend, I think we should use a generic Smalltalk binding for Cairo and not create a new one. What do you think? -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them popular by not having them." James Iry
Damien Cassou wrote:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Michael Rueger <m.rueger@acm.org> wrote:
Michael Rueger wrote:
I'm in favor of pushing the CairoGraphics package and porting Rome to it. Despite (or on top of? ;-) ) my arguments in the previous mail that would be the way to go either way :-)
My argument basically is that we should avoid "trapping" people into the Cairo back-end. It is neither perfect nor the best for every application.
Ok, we have to keep the possibility to change the backend. However, for the Cairo backend, I think we should use a generic Smalltalk binding for Cairo and not create a new one. What do you think?
+1 Michael
participants (5)
-
Damien Cassou -
Igor Stasenko -
Marco Schmidt -
Michael Rueger -
Stéphane Ducasse