From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:59:27 -0700
From: Roman Shaposhnick <rvs@sun.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] [plan9port] graphics
Message-ID: <20060629185927.GD18001@submarine>
References: <ee9e417a0606281046u10a8a596t5875dbcf3e8e8546@mail.gmail.com>
	<ea8273d90ebb08083f50ce5ccfca3afc@quanstro.net>
	<ee9e417a0606290836y69185635q464995f44229a61e@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ee9e417a0606290836y69185635q464995f44229a61e@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7064a484-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 08:36:41AM -0700, Russ Cox wrote:
> responding to earlier questions, you're still supposed
> to use draw(3).  drawfcall(3) is subject to change.

  Thanks. I was just confused that you didn't mention
  draw(3) explicitly and had to resort to euphemisms
  like "protocol" ;-)

Thanks,
Roman.