[Ohrrpgce] SVN: jay/3256 New backend interfaces, updated. Added GFX_PREFERENCES as a preference s

[James Paige]

On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 07:11:41AM +1300, Ralph Versteegen wrote:
> 2009/12/29  <subversion at hamsterrepublic.com>:
> > jay
> > 2009-12-28 16:02:34 -0800 (Mon, 28 Dec 2009)
> > 146
> > New backend interfaces, updated. Added GFX_PREFERENCES as a preference structure. Added interfaces: gfx_SetPreferences() and gfx_GetPreferences().
> > ---
> > U   wip/gfx.new.h
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ohrrpgce mailing list
> > ohrrpgce at lists.motherhamster.org
> > http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org
> >
> 
> Wait, I don't think that this is a good idea. The more complicated
> idea of a list of key-value pairs is much more flexible. Most of the
> things that you've put in GFX_PREFERENCES are gfx_directx specific,
> and you've left out things from other backends, like zoom. And it's
> clearly beneficial to be able to add a new option to a backend without
> having to update all the backends.
> 
> Using key-values pairs doesn't mean having to use gfx_setoption or
> similar. We could modify gfx_Get/SetPreferences to work on an actual
> list.
> 
> Also (in response to the next commit), yes, parsing command line
> options and reading preferences is very similar, and the intention was
> to read preferences and then pass them to the backend with
> gfx_setoption, but if gfx_setoption is removed, we would still need
> some way to figure out which commandline options should be sent to/are
> parsed by the backend. What's the plan if you remove gfx_setoption, to
> hardcode a list of options for the graphics backend? I've been
> thinking that we should go down this route anyway, though it seems
> undesirable.

Because command-line options should override config file options...

---
James Paige