Re: Optional support for GDI+ on Windows (emacs-28)

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

> In most cases, but not all of them.  See above.

My point still holds: what you're asking for is not the "standard
implementation paradigm for optional features on MS-Windows".

> I don't think it is correct for us to commit ourselves to GDI+ right
> now.  We should first see if it is a 100% capable replacement, and
> learn about its advantages and disadvantages.  We always do that with
> new optional features: they start disabled.

His patch doesn't commit to the new code, and it is disabled
by default (it requires `--with-gdiplus`), so it seems to satisfy this
constraints just fine.

> This dependence on MS whims is one significant disadvantage of using
> the native capabilities where ports from Posix are available as
> replacements.

Obviously, I look at this from a very different angle: I'm hoping we can
eventually throw away most of our image handling code and just rely on
native libraries instead (tho I don't know a thing about what
a corresponding native library would be for X11/Cairo).

> So, by and large, I don't think it's reasonable to rush to GDI+
> without collecting experience first, and having those optional knobs
> is necessary for that.

A compile-time option seems plenty to get that experience.
It's what we've had for Cairo.


        Stefan