Re: [Bug-gnubg] question on engine abstraction

[Jon Nall]

Øystein,
that certainly sounds like a step in the right direction. it seems a 
clean engine abstraction could help lots of efforts (new clients, bots, 
etc).

thanks.
nall.

On Sep 19, 2004, at 11:54 AM, Øystein Johansen wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jon Kinsey wrote:
> | Jon Nall wrote:
> |
> |> hello.
> |> how well is the gnubg engine abstracted from the UI? specifically, 
> i'm
> |> curious how much work would be involved to write a new UI that uses
> |> the gnubg engine (i'm thinking of a native OSX client). is there an
> |> API anywhere?
> |>
> |> thanks for any help and/or pointers to documentation.
> |> nall.
> |
> |
> | I was looking at this the other day - it's not very well separated. 
> Give
> | me a few days and I'll see how easy it is to separate it.  I'll have 
> a
> | look at some of the globals too.
>
> I'm able to compile the evaluation routines as a dll here on my windows
> system. Would that be about the same thing as you would want?
>
> I can mail you my Makefile and config and patches if you want?
>
> - -Øystein
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFBTbnR6kDTFPhwyqYRAmArAJ9OH4a7LCxxy1y2POy1BmDbPonfsgCfQx5c
> hcSZs56MyKuFLUO2og4uMGU=
> =Ds14
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----