First let me explain (and perhaps apologize in advance) that part of my motivation for this project was just to see if it could be done, and for the thrill of doing it. So my "abandoning" of GEM may have been premature. However, looking back I do feel there are some differences about my system that I like, though other's opinions may differ.
mine does not.
Or put the other way, what was it that you didn't like about them GEM way ?
dont m9nd guenter - he hasnt a clue.
My only complaint (and it's more of a preference) is that GEM pix objects support multiple types of video data (RGB and grey). I feel it adds a good deal of flexibility to a system when all the data streams are essentially the same and completely interchangable. In hindsight, I could get such behaviour from GEM by simply writing deinterleave and interleave objects (I couldn't find any, but I may be missing something.)
All my objects are fairly well modularized, and having just now revisited the GEM source code, it shouldn't be too much work to wrap them in the pix style.
query - why would one want 2 wrap them in gem - which is arguably the most idiotic + rigid gfx system developed +?
= 01 objekt to bridge if desired mais otherwise ... gem = simply.INFERIOR
ciao.nn