Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!usc!samsung!uunet!orca!undies!pmartz From: pmartz@undies.dsd.es.com (Paul Martz) Newsgroups: comp.graphics Subject: Re: PEX using PHIGS (was Re: PEX, PHIGS, DEC5000?) Message-ID: <1991Mar21.204311.29841@dsd.es.com> Date: 21 Mar 91 20:43:11 GMT References: Sender: usenet@dsd.es.com Reply-To: pmartz@undies.dsd.es.com (Paul Martz) Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, UT Lines: 25 Nntp-Posting-Host: 130.187.85.56 In article , cn09+@andrew.cmu.edu (Christopher Kalevi Nuuja) writes: > I know that the dec and sun implementations of phigs+ (not phigs) are so > different from each other that we needed to write 2 different device drivers > for an application we are working on. Does anyone know if PEX conforms to > sun or dec phigs+ programmer interfaces, or is it also another flavor of > the non-standard? > > (p.s. Standard phigs is identical in both the sun and dec implementations, > but without lightsources, it is useless). Well, the language binding over PEX could be either. But I think what you're asking is, "what's the PEX-SI language binding for phigs+ going to look like?" Well, it looks like the latest DIS C language binding. ("pset_line_color", for example, is the binding for the SET POLYLINE COLOUR function.) This is different from the last version of SunPhigs I saw, and I've never seen DecPhigs, so I don't know what version of the binding they currently use. The latest DIS that the PEX-SI is using (and will be shipped with X11R5) is dated 24 November 1990. Hopefully this will be standardized soon. It's killing those of us with products based on it, and it's driving customers and users crazy. -- -paul pmartz@dsd.es.com Evans & Sutherland