|
Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: [RaaA] Move SDL stuff to target treeRe: [RaaA] Move SDL stuff to target tree
From: Jonathan Gordon <jdgordy_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 00:10:14 +1000 On 16 May 2010 23:23, Dave Chapman <dave_at_dchapman.com> wrote: > 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). > So I pretty much have been thinking the same but couldnt work it right, but bassically you need to remember than the simulator is only a sim and really only for the UI! noone has ever made guarentees about anything other than the display working like a real target. Received on 2010-05-16 Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy |