Garin Hiebert wrote:
Uh. It's been decided (by Sven himself?) to make a new module and
abandon the existing structure for future "portable" development? Are
there developers lined up to maintain MacOS X and Windows "portable"
implementations independent of Creative and Apple?
The whole point of course is that this version be portable - so there
should not *be* separate implementations. This is intended to be a
single implementation that will port to a wide range of systems.
We decided to call it 'portable' because the current name ('linux')
doesn't adequately explain that this version runs on BSD, IRIX, etc.
If nobody in the Windows or MacOSX worlds is interested in keeping it
running on those platforms then it won't be portable to *every* OS - but
it will still be 'the portable version'. Since we have Creative's
and Apple's solutions for those two systems, the need to have the portable
version run there is much reduced and it might indeed be hard to find
developers interested in dealing with it.
What would be nice would be if we could follow the OpenGL path and have
this also be "The Reference Implementation" - against which other versions
could be compared. However, that seems unlikely at this stage.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The second law of Frisbee throwing states: "Never precede any maneuver
by a comment more predictive than "Watch this!"...it turns out that
this also applies to writing Fragment Shaders.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Baker (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail)
L3Com/Link Simulation & Training (817)619-2466 (Fax)
Work: sjbaker@xxxxxxxx http://www.link.com
Home: sjbaker1@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.sjbaker.org
|
