Re: [MiNT] WCOWORK vs WINDOM for components

["Joakim Högberg" <gokmase@gmail.com>]

======= At 2005-07-24, 03:14:42 you wrote: =======

>Windom2 will be provided as a shareable library useable in C, C++, GFA, 
>Asm, etc...

 Well that is all good, more options are always welcome.

>> I don't doubt it is a nice feature of Windom, but Windom ain't the only possible route to
>> take when creating applications.
>>   
>Of course but it's currently the easiest way to create a modern ( 
>frames, etc...) new application compatible with all the systems.

Even so, it is not the choice that everyone will make for compiling applications, I think
that is pretty obvious.

>I have not doubts on that but all the things than the WCOWORK mode will 
>provide exist already in windom.

See above. The point is, some will use Windom while some will not.

>I'm very happy that a coder like Odd continues to make XAAES better, I 
>thank him, but imho, you need to make XAAES/MyAES more attractive for 
>the MagiC User before to change the API.

Personally I don't see the harm, at least not as long as the API changes are not
breaking backwards compatibility. In this case, they don't. They offer new functionality
to software that asks for it. 

>After, you do what you want but keep in mind than almost all the 
>developpers don't want to make an software *only* for XAAES.

For most, it would not be a good time to do that quite yet. But everything must start
somewhere.


Regards,


/Joakim