From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Optional support for GDI+ on Windows (emacs-28) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:26:25 -0400 Message-ID: References: <86lfnh8wzn.fsf@csic.es> <83pncs1ulv.fsf@gnu.org> <86ftdoedvh.fsf@csic.es> <83d08s1nf9.fsf@gnu.org> <831rp81kfs.fsf@gnu.org> <83h7y3z61m.fsf@gnu.org> <83a73vyztt.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="25605"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: juanjose.garciaripoll@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 01 20:27:15 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jJi55-0006Yk-FG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2020 20:27:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35754 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jJi54-0007b8-IM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:27:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53160) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jJi4U-00074p-Ln for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:26:39 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jJi4T-0004pp-5i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:26:38 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:63932) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jJi4Q-00046B-Ct; Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:26:34 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1B159101514; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 14:26:29 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id DC58C1014B9; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 14:26:26 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1585765586; bh=u728iGASA73caMINx2SMOUZT3BiKJ6OZM+gDxKQuhaw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Y9H5cNhrlAJDYQ+Yc+x4NkR22U4xCb4xgzRFckfUhHIT2Vdcn61j1mIf6r9vVj5Qk qM29Gm3L2rMIxCviUK9GHpnhu0+ZRJNWLDMlKTYqHmIVGNQmMIcD9oZZ8BSDgztAN4 q5NSIceJmVY/0ra91So8qlWOp/JbBsY1yRSPbKU5zutsKLMrmHVs6yWwcV+vtOqPqE 7ncKaIQ4Jupm0F+7GumY9djApUb5yvroX0RPZaBIS4KWEch8AeA6d4rkYkstUMLAxz /yAxJuhnsOwuXH+FKm5pUDhRKLFLXExr2rFg9yxqRBYWUp8tyu5cbfszRUl3sPTERi QsA/xPKp0+fcQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [104.247.241.114]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9FBE5120590; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 14:26:26 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83a73vyztt.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 01 Apr 2020 18:45:34 +0300") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:246214 Archived-At: > 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