Code review comment for lp://qastaging/~mir-team/mir/animated-cursors
Revision history for this message
| Andreas Pokorny (andreas-pokorny) wrote | # |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
bbfa235
demo site
(Get the code!)
> > Its rather, the existing BufferStream has special bits about being a
> surface,
> > aka SurfaceBufferSt
>
> That sounds like SurfaceBufferStream /IsA/ BufferStream and the abstractions
> need fixing.
>
> > In the global picture though it makes more sense to
> > me to let that remain as "BufferStream" though.
> >
> > I think maybe the biggest misnomer is mir::scene:
> but
> > the BufferStream doesn't appear in the scene! Perhaps it should be
> > mf::BufferStrea
>
> It would still make more sense to me that the scene contains a variety of
> objects some of which have associated buffer streams. But I don't think the
> scene needs to know anything more than "there is a type BufferStream". Having
> surface derive from BufferStream makes that impossible.
I could also imagine a scene in which surface is only a thing attached to a scene element.
So you could say that a scene does not need to know anything more than 'there is a type surface'. Of course if surface stays our defining scene element your point is perfectly valid. I believe we will iterate on that topic again.