search

AltF02 / x11-rs

Rust bindings for X11 libraries
https://docs.rs/x11
MIT License
206 stars 66 forks source link

Does the glx module overlap with rust-glx? #5

Closed jdm closed 9 years ago

jdm commented 9 years ago

I came across this while looking at how realistic it would be to merge https://github.com/servo/rust-xlib/ and x11-rs. Is there a reason to prefer this repository's glx module over https://github.com/servo/rust-glx/?

ghost commented 9 years ago

When I started this project, there didn't seem to be any xlib or glx bindings on crates.io, but I needed them for one of my other projects. I planned on putting other X11 related libraries (xcb, xft, xrandr, etc) in here as well when I get the time. It would be nice to merge them somehow with servo's X11 bindings to prevent duplication of efforts.

jdm commented 9 years ago

There's also been talk of merging glutin's X11 bindings (which are also extensive) with rust-xlib, but we would need to put rust-xlib on crates.io first. If we can just shift over to using x11-rs instead, that's even less work :)

ghost commented 9 years ago

That all sounds good to me! How would we go about making this happen?

jdm commented 9 years ago

Presumably a PR to glutin that removes ffi.rs and uses a released version of x11-rs. It would be worth ensuring that @tomaka is open to this idea, too :)

ghost commented 9 years ago

I've suggested the idea to @tomaka, and I'm currently adding everything glutin needs to x11-rs.

ghost commented 9 years ago

To answer your original question, generating the bindings from XML as in rust-glx is probably better than hand writing them like I've done here. I'll see if I can switch to that method for my GLX bindings as well as adding generated XCB bindings.

acmiyaguchi commented 9 years ago

There are actually some generated XCB bindings over at https://github.com/Aatch/rust-xcb, they just haven't been updated for a while. I've been working on trying to make things compile now that rust seems to be in a more stable place.

ghost commented 9 years ago

I haven't worked with glgenerator before. When used by glutin, it appears to remove prefixes (glX for functions and `GLX` for constants) from symbols. Can it generate bindings without doing this? It would be inconsistent with the current style of x11-rs.

jdm commented 9 years ago

@bjz ^

ghost commented 9 years ago

By generating function bindings from the C headers, the Xlib and GLX bindings are much more complete now. Everything exported by libX11.so that starts with a capital X is covered. Any structs needed by those functions were added as well (except many used by Xkb and Xcms which were big enough to get their own sub-modules). Other than that, all that's really missing are many of the constants in the C headers.