| Re: [AD] Allegro 4.2 planning |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
On Sunday 17 October 2004 01:53, Chris wrote:
> I think those tentative release dates are way too close together. I'd
> put /at least/ one month between WIP releases, and probably a little
> more before the non-WIP to make sure no issues pop-up.
The reason I put them closer together is because I think it makes sense for
releases to become more frequent if you're close to a stable release. I
don't think we need more than a few weeks between release candidates and
the final version. Also, I don't really like the idea of putting the tree
in feature-freeze for too long.
If issues pop up, we can (and should) postpone the release. I think
show-stopping bugs are unlikely if releases are closer together - plus, I
think it's easier to extend the deadline in case of problems than it is to
shorten the deadline if there are no problems. :)
> Pre-main constructors are only gauranteed to be available with C++,
> aren't they?
Yes and no. It's a GNU extension, but since MacOS X uses gcc, it's
available there too (the UNIX X11 icon setter also uses a constructor
function).
> For some reason I have a feeling that dat2c/s datafiles
> have a default constructor even under C.. wouldn't that cause
> problems?
Not with gcc. I don't know about MSVC though...
> It's basically just the DirectSound voice initialization settings (for
> sound cards with limited hardware voices). We need someone with DSound
> knownledge to look at it.
Ah, ok. So some of the Windows people should look into this, I guess...
Evert