On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 9:32 PM, Chris Morgan chmorgan@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org wrote:
Zachary Goldberg zgold@bluesata.com writes:
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 7:03 AM, Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org wrote:
Writing a DIB engine is not a fill-in-the-blanks exercise. A large part of the task is precisely to come up with a good design, validate it with a prototype,
Would you, Alexandre, say we are at this point? I.e. that Massimo's design is probably an alright prototype but he just hasn't convinced you/Huw yet and hasn't yet "anticipated common objections" etc.?
Well, the prototype doesn't show much evidence of a good design. Maybe Massimo has one in mind, but he hasn't explained it so far.
-- Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org
Wouldn't a review of the proposed dib engine be useful? One that included concerns, things that needed to be changed etc? Everyone involved seems to be asking for leadership and guidance about how to proceed, wouldn't a thorough review of the proposed design give direction towards an "acceptable" design?
Chris
If it wasn't clear, I was suggesting that AJ and/or Huw would do this review since they have knowledge of the issue and an opinion of how it should be done :-)
Chris