Originally posted by nzjrs
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland
Collapse
X
-
Pango depends on the backend: cairo and FT go to images, Xft backend text.
Okay, I was wrong here, the popular toolkits don't draw text in a way that could easily pass it forwards.
However, modifying them to do so is significantly less work than inventing a protocol for each toolkit.
Comment
-
Originally posted by curaga View PostPango depends on the backend: cairo and FT go to images, Xft backend text.
Okay, I was wrong here, the popular toolkits don't draw text in a way that could easily pass it forwards.
However, modifying them to do so is significantly less work than inventing a protocol for each toolkit.
But considering toolkit's people didn't either use X facilities for that or make their own specification for drawing, chances are there is not enough interest, and it's already running the inefficient way, which means there's no real loss in that aspect from switching to Wayland.
Comment
-
Originally posted by curaga View PostPango depends on the backend: cairo and FT go to images, Xft backend text.
Okay, I was wrong here, the popular toolkits don't draw text in a way that could easily pass it forwards.
However, modifying them to do so is significantly less work than inventing a protocol for each toolkit.
GTK3 already has a HTML5 backend (or it's in development, or something). I'm pretty sure Qt could (if it hasn't already) develop something similar, and EFL as well. There's no point in forcing every app to use some kind of archaic drawing API because what about things like SDL, or apps that only play video and don't need any (or only minimal) UI, or games...? Those would have no need whatsoever to go through the extra overhead of a drawing API. And no matter how you implement it, it's extra overhead, and you'll have to allow direct-rendering in some form or other (in order to allow video playback, among other things), which means, the toolkits would just continue bypassing it and nothing would change.
Comment
-
Originally posted by curaga View PostPlease read my original post: http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...448#post335448
It explains why the feature is important. And yes, it's still used.
Do you agree with the points of my original post?
Comment
-
Originally posted by curaga View PostProving what? It proves my point that there exists at least one toolkit that does it properly.
Wayland, in the end, is simply operating with buffers. The whole process happening outside of blitting is not interesting to it, so there is:
Application "asking"(like in your post) toolkit to do stuff on canvas.
After this, toolkit handles the buffer to wayland which manages the composition to screen buffer.
So, only two steps.
And with X, being "asked" by everyone to do huge amount of things, doesn't exactly this make X to become all-mighty bottleneck?
We also know, that we can SIMD buffer transfers, but its much harder to SIMD "questions"...?Last edited by brosis; 09 June 2013, 08:15 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ericg View Post2) Monkey suit? o.O I must have missed that episode
If however, you want a good laugh, this episode has them discussing Mir extensively. The relevant and highly embarrassing bits are between 0:38:00-0:41:30 and 0:54:36-1:04:40. Those guys bought Canonical's PR like the worst Shuttleworth fanboys on omgubuntu.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kostas View PostCouldn't find the episode but here are the details of the bet.
If however, you want a good laugh, this episode has them discussing Mir extensively. The relevant and highly embarrassing bits are between 0:38:00-0:41:30 and 0:54:36-1:04:40. Those guys bought Canonical's PR like the worst Shuttleworth fanboys on omgubuntu.
Comment
Comment