Re: [AD] Proposal for Allegro's future (namespaces, et al.)

[Laurence Withers <lwithers@xxxxxxxxxx>]

In reply to Elias Pschernig <eliaspschernig@xxxxxxxxxx>:

>I wrote:
>>  - use the Allegro library, but on compilation, all symbols would be
>>    renamed via preprocessor defines, to implement prefixes.
>
>I don't like this step, it just feels not right to use other symbols in
>the library source than in a user program for me. I.e. "al_create_bitmap"
>*always* should be named like that, and not "create_bitmap" at some places
>and maybe even something else at others.

Fine, it can really be done any way you like. This just seemed a decent
way of dropping the latest Allegro source into the AllegroZilla tree and
building without hassle. You could use some sed commands to accomplish
this same thing, however.

>I wrote:
>> And then people can choose between Allegro and AllegroZilla, and
>> everyone will be happy.
>
>Yes, besides what I said above, I like this idea :)

It does have some advantages.

> I would even go a step
>further and make AllegroZilla modular.
[snip]

That's for the AllegroZilla folks to decide ;^). They can do whatever
they want without breaking Allegro, and we don't have to code it...

Bye for now,
-- 
Laurence Withers, lwithers@xxxxxxxxxx
                http://www.lwithers.demon.co.uk/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature