Re: [AD] Possible new features for Allegro?

["Gillius" <gillius@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Preach on!  This thread is wild.  In fact, I downloaded a new email 
client today just so I could finally respond to this list (my email 
has a different address coming in as going out, which this list will not
allow, so I have to spoof my email addy.. )

I already think Allegro is already way bloated and if anything 
features need to be removed.  I was going to earlier advocate for a 
"plug in" or customizable system but this would be confusing for the end
user because each Allegro DLL would be different.

As for the earlier complaints.  There are add-on libs that I use that do
JPEG and do mod/xm/it music, and good looking GUI's.  There are also
add-ons that do MP3 stuff and everything else we have talked about.  As
for GL, use George's own AllegroGL library.

This has some problems too though.  It makes your program impossible for
anyone else to compile and gives you too many dependancies in UNIX, so
this is an argument for integration with the core.

My programs now use 2-5 add-on libraries that I have to distribute or the
user need to download.  They are even worse to compile since not all of
the libs have makefiles and stuff.

Gillius

On 12 Dec 2001 at 19:34, George Foot wrote:
> (re: whole thread)  Good grief!  I'd much rather take things
> *out* of the core of Allegro, split it into separate libraries
> (distribute them together if you like), so that people can pick
> and choose.
> 
> George
>