From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE,SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B4D1BBAF for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 16:55:27 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: As8BAKNQEUlDWxLCbmdsb2JhbACBd5IiPq0QhmOELoNT X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,551,1220220000"; d="scan'208";a="19603369" Received: from ip67-91-18-194.z18-91-67.customer.algx.net (HELO server1.bertec.net) ([67.91.18.194]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 05 Nov 2008 16:55:26 +0100 Received: from kuba.bertec.net (kuba.bertec.net [192.168.2.16]) by server1.bertec.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CB5510573C for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 10:55:26 -0500 (EST) From: Kuba Ober To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] What does Jane Street use/want for an IDE? What about you? Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 10:55:24 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <200810200919.41561.ober.14@osu.edu> <200811051020.27633.ober.14@osu.edu> <200811051639.23844.jon@ffconsultancy.com> In-Reply-To: <200811051639.23844.jon@ffconsultancy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200811051055.25456.ober.14@osu.edu> X-Spam: no; 0.00; abstraction:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 renderer:01 higher-level:01 triangles:01 smoke:98 smoke:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 stack:01 caml-list:01 functions:01 water:98 snip:02 On Wednesday 05 November 2008, Jon Harrop wrote: > On Wednesday 05 November 2008 15:20:26 Kuba Ober wrote: [snip] > > So, please understand that I'm not oblivious to benefits of thinking in > > higher levels of abstraction, but I'm also practical and know that Qt > > provides me with a whole big lot of cross-platform functionality that > > simply doesn't exist anywhere else in one coherent platform. > > Maybe if I release Smoke as open source software OCaml will become usable > for advanced GUI programming. If I don't, I think OCaml is dead in the > water in this respect. Would it be useful, then, to have Smoke have a built-in renderer for embedded/non-accelerated platforms? It should still be faster than Mesa, since you can work with higher-level objects that can perhaps be drawn faster with object-specific rendering functions, instead of having to tesselate everything and then just work on triangles? I'm pretty sure that such built-in rendering would perform better and have smaller footprint for non-accelerated platforms than going through the whole OpenGL stack. What do you think? Then, there's still a whole lot of work in getting OCaml interoperate with native platform (think OLE, browser plugins, yada yada). Kuba