|
Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: [RaaA] Move SDL stuff to target treeRe: [RaaA] Move SDL stuff to target tree
From: Dave Chapman <dave_at_dchapman.com>
Date: Sun, 16 May 2010 14:23:36 +0100 pouly amaury wrote: > > What do you think about it? Do you have any ideas how my proposal > could be improved? Or do you have any questions? Please join the > discussion. > > > Sounds ok for me, I like the idea of the simulator being a real target. Apologies for answering so late (too late in a way, as this patch was committed yesterday), but the concept of the simulator being a real target worries me. This is simply because the simulator *isn't* a real target - it's a simulation of a real target. My understanding of the purpose of RaaA is that it would use less and less of the Rockbox firmware code as time went on. Development of the sim should go in the opposite direction - using more and more Rockbox code. I'm also not convinced that changing some #ifdef SIMULATOR lines to use things like HAVE_SDL or HAVE_SDL_AUDIO makes the code for the simulator better. IMO it makes it harder to see the places where the sim differs from the target it's simulating (it still differs in the same way, it's just obfuscated more). As an example of the different purposes of the sim and RaaA, the SDL button driver for RaaA should expose all buttons to the apps/ part of Rockbox (especially if there is a full keyboard on the device). The SDL button code for the sim should (although it doesn't currently) provide simulation of the hardware buttons (and/or touchscreen and remote) on the real device, including things like mechanical and electrical limitations. Other buttons are used for events such as USB insertion/removal. Similarly, the LCD code for the sim presents the main LCD, the remote LCD (if present on the target), a backdrop image, simulation of backlights, simulation of charcell etc. For RaaA, none of those complications are needed, but different complications may be - such as possible window resizing, or run-time detection of LCD size (if we go all the way with RaaA), or other things we haven't thought of yet. Am I missing something obvious? Why is putting the sim code in target tree a good idea? I would have preferred to have seen a new SDL target being added to the target tree, with none of the sim code in it - i.e. a shiny new SDL target without the baggage of the sim, and leaving the sim free to be developed and improved independently of RaaA (and in the opposite direction). Regards, Dave. Received on 2010-05-16 Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy |