Re: [dev] libdraw development

From: Anselm R Garbe <>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 10:42:11 +0200

On 3 September 2010 10:28, Connor Lane Smith <> wrote:
> On Friday, September 3, 2010, Uriel <> wrote:
>> I understand that when you are busy reinventing square wheels, causing
>> extra confusion is the least of your worries...
> Clearly you didn't read the explanation of what libdraw is... Allow me
> to reiterate: the functions already existed within dwm, dmenu, and
> tabbed. They are now a part of a separate library, simply for ease of
> development. In its present state it does not even handle the creation
> of windows, let alone any of the various other things Plan 9's does.
> As noted by Szabolcs, it uses Xlib functions directly and so is
> several orders of magnitude smaller than Plan 9's. Seriously. Since
> you haven't even looked at it yet, I urge you to check the vast
> difference in code complexity. It may just be me, but weren't we
> trying to write simple software, not just use libraries that already
> exist because OMG they're in Plan 9!
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I also don't think one cannot use Plan
> 9's libdraw (constrained as it is by rio's limited windowing
> capabilities) to create redirect-overridden windows like those
> required by dwm and dmenu. Not, at least, without some dirty hacks. If
> this is the case then how, exactly, are we meant to use that library?

Plan 9's libdraw is very different to the libdraw we are discussing.
libdraw of dmenu/dwm is intended to be used for different backends,
not just xlib, hence having libxdraw would be misleading. If we think
about a better name, what about libdc? There is one already, what a
surprise, but porbably the conflict here would be less intense. Since
all functions are dc_ prefixed, libdc makes sense.

Received on Fri Sep 03 2010 - 10:42:11 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Sep 03 2010 - 10:48:02 CEST