Proposal: OpenGL/GLUT

[Jason Dagit]

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Mikhail Glushenkov <
the.dead.shall.rise at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Jason Dagit <dagitj at gmail.com> wrote:
> > http://trac.haskell.org/haskell-platform/wiki/Proposals/OpenGL
> >
> > OpenGLRaw: provides low-level foreign imports and marshalling code for
> > directly interfacing with the C OpenGL API. This library is used by
> > higher-level abstractions, such as the OpenGL package, and closely
> matches the
> > C API for OpenGL.
>
> One question about naming: do we want to adopt some standard naming
> scheme for such libraries (consisting mostly of raw FFI bindings)? For
> example, the low-level bindings library for LLVM is called llvm-base,
> and a popular naming convention on Hackage seems to be bindings-* [1].
> If we at some point decide to add some other low-level FFI bindings
> library to HP, it'd be nice if the naming convention was uniform.
>

I'd prefer to separate that discussion from the current proposal. Mainly
because if folks decide that platform packages are subject to naming
requirements like this then maintainers should be given time to adjust. I
think that in turn will require dependent packages to updated. In this
case, everything that currently uses OpenGLRaw would potentially be
affected.

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://projects.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-platform/attachments/20130320/ba217753/attachment.htm>