From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Can we go GTK-only? Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:13:55 +0300 Message-ID: <83r371rln0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <24db2975-17ca-ad01-20c8-df12071fa89a@dancol.org> <80a328fa-0a6f-820c-c2ce-b5e717a90f0d@cs.ucla.edu> <20161027191502.1050b201@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477639936 32677 195.159.176.226 (28 Oct 2016 07:32:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 07:32:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, dancol@dancol.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Perry E. Metzger" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 28 09:32:08 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c01dm-00057B-GI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:31:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47180 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c01do-0001db-Sm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:31:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42588) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c01MP-0004XX-ON for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:13:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c01ML-0002Aj-P0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:13:53 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:44934) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c01ML-0002Af-L9; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:13:49 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3661 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1c01MK-0007OW-Ti; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:13:49 -0400 In-reply-to: <20161027191502.1050b201@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> (perry@piermont.com) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:208921 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:15:02 -0400 > From: "Perry E. Metzger" > Cc: Daniel Colascione , > Emacs developers > > On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 13:32:14 -0700 Paul Eggert > wrote: > > Alternatively, how about if we change the GTK port to be more like > > the NS port? That is, we leave xterm.o, xfns.c, xselect.c etc. > > alone (except for removing the GTK-related parts), and have new > > source files gtkterm.c, gtkfns.c, gtkselect.c etc. as needed to > > support GTK. The GTK port would no longer define HAVE_X_WINDOWS. > > That way, the no-toolkit, Motif, and Athena configurations would > > still work, without getting in the way of GTK. > > This seems like a good idea. Emacs already has multiple front ends. > Having a distinct GTK front end seems like a good, clean sort of > segregation. The legacy code can be left in and alone for now for the > benefit of those who use it. It's not as trivial as it sounds, because our experience shows that such a separation causes duplication of code. Minimizing code duplication makes the job harder.