From: Marcus Sundberg <mackan@stacken.kth.se>
  To  : ggi-develop@eskimo.com
  Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 22:13:13 +0000

Re: RFC: Abstract register handling in KGI

Jon M. Taylor wrote:

> Right now we have to describe the registers anyway, but we end up
> "describing" the meta-register (I like your term better) space in the code
> directly, with no standardization.  ACCEL_out16(), CLK_in8(),
> restore_CRT(), etc.  Better to have a bunch of nice, clean, well-defined
> abstract types whose relationships and dependencies are easy to see, no?

Isn't the new KGI (which I still haven't had time to have a closer 
look at) supposed to take care of this?

I don't see much point in putting any larger work into improving
the KGI that KGIcon is based on as it's broken in most, if not all,
possible ways.

//Marcus
-- 
-------------------------------+------------------------------------
        Marcus Sundberg        | http://www.stacken.kth.se/~mackan/
 Royal Institute of Technology |       Phone: +46 707 295404
       Stockholm, Sweden       |   E-Mail: mackan@stacken.kth.se