22 Feb
2011
22 Feb
'11
1:18 p.m.
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 09:14:31PM -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Fons Adriaensen
<fons(a)linuxaudio.org> wrote:
You can run X11 apps in OSX. So you can have the host side of a plugin
library that is an X11 client.
But I think you are missing the point: it's not focussing on X11.
It is simply that the only interaction between a host and a plugin
(for what regards their visual integration) should be the lowest
common level between the toolsets each of then uses and not anything
that is a private type of either . For current toolkits (on Linux)
this an X11 window ID. It's all plugin needs in order to know where
on the screen it should go. And the rest it can do itself.
If the underlying layer is not X11 this is just the same. Every
system needs some abstraction of 'an area of the screen that is
managed as a basic unit'. In X11 that is represented by a window
ID, in other systems it will be something similar.
This excludes Windows (TM), but again, I
couln't care less.
It also excludes OS X, which despite having "X11 support" isn't really
what you mean by "supports X11". at some point, focusing on X11 will also start to
exclude the next
generation of linux UI systems which are not going to be X11 (even
though they are re-using a lot of the internal code and can host X11
windows). once you've seen them in action, i think that even you will
be a believer :) I'm talking primarily about Wayland
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayland_%28display_server_protocol%29
ATM it doesn't even provide network transparancy. Which means you can't
even do the equivalent of ssh -X.
Ciao,
--
FA