Re: [AD] Documentation/tutorial

[Elias Pschernig <allefant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> In practice, no one gets updated documentation until a new version of
> Allegro is released. I don't think tutorials should be bound to

Yes. But look at the situation now.. Vivace seems to be the most
popular tutorial even though it wasn't updated since, well, forever.
Having an up-to-date tutorial for the version of Allegro you
downloaded it with would be a big plus.

> Allegro for (primarily) this reason. It's just extra bloat that will
> need to be maintained and kept up to date as Allegro changes.
> 

That's true..

> Tutorials are a good thing, and they should be readily available, but
> including them in the official Allegro distribution is a bad thing,
> IMHO. We've already got examples that clearly show how different parts
> of Allegro work.
> 

Yes, I agree with that last sentence - the examples and the current
documentation have a lot of overlap with Vivace. Vivace also comes
with its own example program(s) if I remember right. Maybe we should
go for a shorter tutorial, or strip down Vivace somewhat if it gets
included. There need not be detailed explanation of functions which
are already documented, or a description of how the grabber works.
Both can be looked up. Something which would be ideal would be if the
included tutorial could just describe the demo game step by step. But
that would mean a better demo game (code-wise) :P

Anyway, this should be up to whoever volunteers to include a tutorial.
Since we agree that a tutorial would be a good thing, and the only
problem is maintaining it - we surely could include one if someone
makes one that is good enough - and updating wouldn't be more of a
problem than updating the examples or FAQ.