Then use a different one, like xcb. Or even abandon it altogether and use Wayland.
> How have we managed to hang onto this monstrosity for so long?
Because it (largely) works.
And 99% of people don't ever have to come into contact with it.
> Now your average Linux desktop builds a lot on X11 to get it to perform how it does now
If you mean "builds a lot on" you mean "ignores the vast majority of outdated features of", then yes.
> but all this effort is a huge waste
Not really. A lot of the stuff replacing X11 cruft had to be implemented anyway, and the weird X11 hacks, well, they were just what was needed at the time to get work done. No use in crying over spilt milk.
> Just compare it to something like Apple's UIKit or Android's layouts
What would be the point in that? They serve very different purposes.
>> but the API really is terrible
>
> Then use a different one, like xcb.
The problem is that it is difficult to use xcb with GLX. I just say glXChooseFBConfig. And I consider using Xlib for these API functions - as suggested on http://xcb.freedesktop.org/opengl/ as an even larger mess.
Then use a different one, like xcb. Or even abandon it altogether and use Wayland.
> How have we managed to hang onto this monstrosity for so long?
Because it (largely) works.
And 99% of people don't ever have to come into contact with it.
> Now your average Linux desktop builds a lot on X11 to get it to perform how it does now
If you mean "builds a lot on" you mean "ignores the vast majority of outdated features of", then yes.
> but all this effort is a huge waste
Not really. A lot of the stuff replacing X11 cruft had to be implemented anyway, and the weird X11 hacks, well, they were just what was needed at the time to get work done. No use in crying over spilt milk.
> Just compare it to something like Apple's UIKit or Android's layouts
What would be the point in that? They serve very different purposes.