OpenEuphoria

Re: Llama

• Posted by "Cuny, David" <David.Cuny at DSS.CA.GOV> Apr 13, 1999
• 473 views

C. K. Lester wrote:

> So how are we going to be sure that we've got one
> flavor of Llama, as opposed to everybody's adding
> their own stuff or even modifying standard stuff?

According to the "bazaar" method of coding, it's best to let the market
decide on the winner. As I mentioned, I'm not *quite* ready to open the code
to the "bazaar".

I think that contributions will fall into the following categories:

1. Portable native classes. These are the base classes that are supplied
with Llama that implement native controls and windows. Ports on other
platforms will be expected to support this set of widgets. I imagine that
I'll be maintaining the "official" portable release.

2. Non-portable native classes. These are controls that are not supported on
other platforms, such as OpenGL graphics, sound support, and DDE. These I
would keep out of the "portable" release, but are probably going to be
essential to stuff like games in Llama.

3. Portable emulated classes. These are non-native controls (such as a Clock
class, or Dos32 controls) that is coded using calls to the User API. These
controls should be portable to any platform, since the consist entirely of
calls to the portable native classes.


It's certainly feasible that someone could take Llama and build their own
classes that don't follow the API that I've set out. That's fine with me.
But I don't think that Llama is going to be that far off the mark.


> You better take your laptop and wireless modem!!! hahaha

I'm sure Jiri will appreciate a break from all this Win32 drivel (although a
Dos32 port of Llama is planned).

-- David Cuny