|
|
Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer) [message #29893 is a reply to message #29892] |
Sat, 27 November 2010 19:51 |
|
mirek
Messages: 13975 Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
dolik.rce wrote on Sat, 27 November 2010 13:00 |
luzr wrote on Sat, 27 November 2010 18:21 | BTW, my motivations is even more ambitious - this will allow me to experiment with "ultra-thin" web apps, where all processing is done by U++ and displayed by Java on the client (alt. Flash or maybe even Javascript) in a way similar to Terminal Services. So basically developing app with web interface should be principally the same as developing normal 'fat' U++ app...
|
Do you mean something like this: http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2010/11/23/gtk3-vs-html5/? (Just better, as it will be written in U++ )
|
Yes. The question is at what level to do rendering. Above example simply passes changes in raster graphics. I believe that transfering "Draw stream" is more viable solution. I have done some preliminary experiments and have found that my current bussines application "full rePaint" produces Draw data that can be compressed to something like 5-8KB, maybe even much less (well, Image data are not in this, but after all, Images will be transfered just once...)
|
|
|
|
|
Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: kohait00 on Thu, 18 November 2010 09:15
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: koldo on Thu, 18 November 2010 11:13
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: kohait00 on Thu, 18 November 2010 11:19
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: koldo on Thu, 18 November 2010 11:23
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: mirek on Sat, 27 November 2010 18:21
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: mirek on Sat, 27 November 2010 19:51
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: koldo on Sun, 28 November 2010 09:51
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: mirek on Sun, 28 November 2010 12:21
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: unodgs on Sun, 28 November 2010 12:27
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: mirek on Sun, 28 November 2010 12:51
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: Tom1 on Mon, 29 November 2010 10:11
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: zsolt on Fri, 17 December 2010 12:16
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: mirek on Sat, 18 December 2010 09:37
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: mr_ped on Mon, 29 November 2010 10:32
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: mirek on Mon, 29 November 2010 10:50
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: Tom1 on Mon, 29 November 2010 12:56
|
|
|
Re: Porting Upp to SDL first ? (cause of MacOSX & framebuffer)
By: mirek on Mon, 29 November 2010 19:08
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon May 06 19:36:59 CEST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02836 seconds
|
|
|