🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug18.182730.3478@dsd.es.com>, rthomson@mesa.dsd.es.com (Rich Thomson) writes:
|> 
|> In article <1992Aug14.210903.23864@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>
|> 	John Lu <luj@ecn.purdue.edu> writes:
|> >The biggest plus of the PHIGS(+) seems to be the fact that it is
|> >an international standard. [...] When will PHIGS/PHIGS PLUS incorporate
|> >those requirements [anti-aliasing, texture-mapping] so that one can be
|> >_guranteed_ to have portablity and uniformity ?  
|> 
|> Oh, I guess I mis-parsed your previous statement.  When you said
|> "PHIGS/PHIGS-PLUS can never speed up", were you referring to the speed
|> of an implementation (what I thought), or the speed of the standards
|> process?  

Well, if you had read the original article by jarl@hsr.no (Jarl Haugland) more
carefully, such misunderstanding would have not existed.
jarl@hsr.no (Jarl Haugland) was clearly demanding the advanced features 
from the PHIGS(+).

|> [ deteled ...]
|> >	2). It is quite evident that the PHIGS API has _much_ room to desire.
|> 
|> Quite evident to you perhaps.  Others may disagree.  Its important to
|> make the distinction between fact and opinion.  The above is clearly
|> your opinion.
|> 
But my opinions stem from the facts or experience :-).  Just introduce 
the PHIGS API to another "random" person who is familiar w/ other graphics APIs, 
see what're his "opinions".


|> 
|> Under OpenGL, the same reformatting happens; you merely get what
|> language designers call "syntactic sugar" so that you can provide the
|> data in any datatype you wish.  
|> [ .... ]
|> >In PHIGS and PEXlib, data reformating is almost essential, it is ubiquitous.
|> 
|> PEXlib is not intended to be an API, but an SPI.  If you want the
|> same syntactic sugar that is provided in OpenGL, you can write a
|> toolkit on top of PEXlib that does this reformatting for you.
|> 
Wrong. These points have been talked quite in detail by Allen Akin.
You can provid _syntax sugar_ for PHIGS API or PEXlib, but this is is 
an _extra_ layer of reformatting the application data. It is this 
appendage layer that I, as a user, want to avoid if possible.

|> >I do have some boxes running PEX-SI
|> 
|> If possible, I recommend you get a PEX server from your workstation
|> vendor instead of the PEX-SI.  

I am waiting for the PEX servers to arrive.

-- John Lu
   luj@ecn.purdue.edu