Cairo Proposed To Become Part Of ISO C++

[pal666]

So all those people writing software that manipulates images on headless servers, for example on web servers, is written by people that shouldn't program in the first place, because you can't use hardware acceleration in that environment?

what makes you think headless servers can't use acceleration ? acceleration has nothing to do with monitor
yes, clueless people shouldn't program in the first place

[pal666]

No, you cannot use STL containers via composition across a DLL barrier either. You need to use the pimpl idiom to maintain ABI compatibility. Which is precisely what Qt does.

please show word 'composition' in my post. you used strawman

[pal666]

That is why I think it was mistake.

well, you are entitled to think whatever you want, but standards are created for everyone(including people on other oses), not just for you

[Ancurio]

Lots of libraries also tend to do "everything", but doing nothing very well. Just take a look at the massive feature set of libraries like SDL. They should have focused solely on window and event management and doing it very well, instead of having an impressive feature list consisting mostly of useless implementations.

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.

[Ancurio]

not if you want hardware acceleration. and who doesn't, should keep his hands out of programming

Yeah, but if you want hardware acceleration you weren't looking for OS agnostic code paths in the first place.

[pal666]

Yeah, but if you want hardware acceleration you weren't looking for OS agnostic code paths in the first place.

this proposal tries to fix exactly that problem

[JS987]

I just noticed this too when digging a bit further. Damn, what a shame. This means libraries like Qt, SFML, SDL etc. which already provide thread abstractions will continue to have to be used for a long time to come.

If you are using Qt, it is better to prefer Qt classes because of compatibility.

[LightBit]

well, you are entitled to think whatever you want, but standards are created for everyone(including people on other oses), not just for you

No. You see, if POSIX would be included into ISO, programs would be much more portable (and therefore for everyone).
I am using POSIX compatible OS. So it doesn't make any difference for me, but it would make huge difference for most people (Windows).
If I do something for myself, I don't need any standard.

[carewolf]

No, you cannot use STL containers via composition across a DLL barrier either. You need to use the pimpl idiom to maintain ABI compatibility. Which is precisely what Qt does.

Qt is not entirely safe across link boundaries either. It works if everything behaves nicely, uses proper shared linking and compatible versions of Qt. If one of the shared libraries/plugins was static linked with Qt things can break rather badly or more commonly if two major versions such as Qt4 or Qt5 are crossed, or versions where an ABI breaking configure option was used.

[Marc Driftmeyer]

It is still drawing. That's the point. I'm not against standardizing drawing, but just pointing out that drawing doesn't imply the use of a screen. Displaying requires a screen, not drawing.



Except that doesn't make sense, because it wasn't Cairo proposing this, but the other way around.

All the more reason Cairo devs should shoot it down.