Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: discussion regarding adding settings (PLEASE add your 2 cents)
Re: discussion regarding adding settings (PLEASE add your 2 cents)
From: Jonathan Gordon <jdgordy_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 00:42:31 +1100
2008/10/28 alex wallis <alexwallis646_at_googlemail.com>:
>> I'm with the people who are against having settings which are not
>> (easily) configurable on the DAP itself. The furthest away from the
>> core I would suggest is as a plugin.
> Hi. I'm afraid that this will probably look like i'm complaining hear.
> However, again as i've said before in other posts on other topics, with your
> above comment, if we have settings as a plugin, we run into the good old
> brick wall that plugins are as yet not accessible with the speech interface.
> However if they were accessible with the speech interface, I would have no
> objection at all to settings being turned into plugins.
which is why noone has done anything in this direction.
> Does anyone no what happened to that particular gsoc project?
> As for stripping out useless features, if we want to save bin size or just
> in general cut down on compile time, why don't we strip out doom? I mean
> doom is a bit of an old game now, takes ages to compile and I seriously
> can't imagine a majority of people play doom on there mp3 players, and the
> same goes for the other emulators.
> I mean I can imagine people playing other games such as chess, but doom is a
> completely different matter.
doom adds 0 to the bin/ram problem, the only reason we have it is
because its a plugin and doesnt waste any ram if its not used.
Received on 2008-10-27