Re: Fw: Re: [AD] messy allegro 5.0 stuff

["Eric Botcazou" <ebotcazou@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> Although, on some platforms the threads were only needed in order to
> match the global variable / callback model that Allegro was using.

So, using threads internally was only an ad hoc decision to mimic the DOS
behaviour ? Then I wish Stefan hadn't stepped down from the development,
because I'd like to ask him why the Windows port was using so many threads
(9 in the test program as of the 3.9.34 version !), while 3 could have been
enough.

> that would also have hugely simplified some of the surface locking issues
> in the Windows port (given entirely polled input, it would have been
> possible to do 100% automatic and efficient surface locking without the
> user everneeding to be aware of it).

How so ? Locking everything and unlocking only when the user polls ?

> The really silly thing would be to try to do both, in which case all
> platforms would end up jumping through hoops :-)

I probably missed something during the past month because I thought we have
been talking about revamping the API, not redesigning another library. I
don't have anything against that, but I would have liked to be informed ;-)

---
Eric Botcazou
ebotcazou@xxxxxxxxxx