Re: The best/standard way to use opengl in gtk

[Jeremy Henty <onepoint starurchin org>]

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 06:03:03PM +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 16:08 +0100, Jeremy Henty wrote:
> 
> > We gave up on clutter because of its performance.  Not only did it
> > render  slowly but  creating a  new clutter  item was  O(number of
> > already existing items).
> 
> it's a scene graph: what did you expect? :-p

Hey, if  I had  known what  to expect I  wouldn't have  been profiling
things!  :-p  ;-) But  seriously, I was  surprised to see  O(n) insert
performance.  Are  scene graphs so  new/esoteric that no-one  has done
better?

> > Clutter seems to be focussed on eye-candy.
> 
> "eye-candy" has generally negative connotations.

Don't get me started on "hacker"!

> Clutter is meant to be  used to create compelling and dynamical user
> interfaces;

I did try to make it clear (and  it's my bad if I failed) that I think
clutter is a good choice  for desktop apps, which is obviously Gnome's
focus.   Unfortunately  I have  to  write  genome  browsers, in  which
context  "compelling  and dynamical"  means  "can  render a  gajillion
alingment features before the user  dies of boredom".  Sucks to be me,
I guess.  :-)

> ... on X11 you get an expose event for real windows; in Clutter, the
> only  Window, as  far as  X11 is  concerned, is  the  one implicitly
> created by  a Stage. gtk+ 2.x  too has moved  away from sub-windows;
> and in 3.x  gtk moves away from expose  events delivered to widgets,
> in favour of  a Clutter-like approach of top-down  "draw" calls sent
> to each widget.

Thanks for  the heads-up.  Does  this relate to what  Havoc Pennington
says here:

    http://log.ometer.com/2010-09.html

Regards,

Jeremy Henty