On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 10:11 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:45:50 am walt wrote: > > The 'infrastructure' I keep referring to has to do only with the > > GUI interface of pan. The critical parts that you (Charles) have > > spent so much effort in optimizing for speed and memory use, are > > all in c++, am I right? > > > > So -- why not implement the pan GUI in java and let each platform > > deal with the optimized c++ part in its own way (already done)? > > Please no. Pan is nice and snappy and responsive, and works reasonably > well even in relatively low-end machines with not a lot of memory. The > last thing we want is to pair a fast, snappy engine with a UI that > takes forever to start up, looks hideous, requires vast amounts of > memory, and ends up clomping around with lead boots squashing > everything in it's path. Separation of the back-end from the front-end > is a perfectly sensible idea. It's only the use of Java as the default > front-end which I object to. > >
Given that Charles has championed lean, tight code in Transmission -- embracing the project's design goals from the beginning of his involvement -- I rather doubt he could be convinced that Java should ever touch Pan. Just my opinion. But, witness the difference between Transmission and Vuze, as an example: http://pastehtml.com/view/090621g11KlBWM.html _______________________________________________ Pan-users mailing list Pan-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
