Re: [AD] Too old allegro for Windows platform !

[Evert Glebbeek <eglebbk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Friday 28 April 2006 19:02, Roger Moffa wrote:
> I have just before Dev-c++ used MS-VC 6 for compile allegro source but it 
whas hardly to get a error free binary form of allegro.

Then you're doing something seriously wrong. Did you follow the build 
instructions? What errors did you get?

> DirectX: pro => very fast, allways updated
>             con => difficult to learn, to use and to program. DirectX 
change too much time and the code must be update with new API.

You can add `Windows only' to that list.

> Allegro: 
[...]
>NOT EASY TO COMPILE THE SOURCE CODE, 

First, DON'T SHOUT.
It is if you follow the instructions (not that you have to compile it 
yourself though).

>INCOMPATIBLE WITH OLDER VERSION !!!

Hardly. You can compile Allegro 1.0 code with a few, 3.x code with only 
minor changes and properly written 4.0 code with no changes at all.

>PLATFORM INDEPENDANT MORE THAN HYPOTHETICAL

I don't quite follow what you mean here. You can develop an Allegro program 
in Linux and compile and run it in Windows without changing a single line 
of code.

>           Alternative => SDL and OpenGL

OpenGL only does graphics.

> 1) For first: PLEASE test the compilation makefile before releasing new 
Allegro release.

Don't be silly. Of *course* it's tested (though now and then an unfortunate 
error slips through, such was the case for 4.2.0 and DJGPP), and in fact 
it compiles fine in Windows.

>    I am not a guru programmer level, just an intermediate one (self 
learning programming of long time now), and i am null with makefile. I do 
no understand all the dependance and cross-platform things and others 
'make' language.

All you need to know about it is to run make, as described in the 
installation instructions.

> Now for more to say, Allegro is no more compatible with ... Allegro 
because 99% of the source code from tutorials and books that i have 
encouter for now cannot be compiled without bugs or impossibility to run 
without crashing !!! 

In that case, chances are that there's something seriously wrong with the 
code you're trying to use. However, if you're sure there's a bug 
somewhere, post the smallest example programme that reproduces the error.

> I have try a lot of time to compile source examples from the books "Game 
Programming All In One 2ndEdition 2004",

Urgh. I won't venture an opinion on the text in the book since I've never 
seen it, but I have seen some code that came from it and it has serious 
problems that have nothing to do with Allegro.
If you feel like it, you can have a look at one of the discussions I've had 
with the author here:
http://www.jharbour.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=7&t=346&s=5c786a0ef2ced5401cd15d6be131d5d5

> making change and using different compilers. They do not compile/run 
anymore. 

I've heard this claim several times from the writer of the book and 
repeatedly asked for examples and clarifications, and never received any.
I say it's rubbish. You might get a couple of warnings for using deprecated 
functions, but any and all 4.0 code I've ever written (or seen for that 
matter) compiles and runs with 4.2.
If you find that it's otherwise, post the code in question or provide a 
download link for it. Also note that *if* a valid 4.0 programme doesn't 
compile with 4.2, then it's a bug in 4.2 and that should be fixed (which 
we cannot do without more information than `it doesn't work').

> What i am asking is: PLEASE upgrade/update the source code for at least 
DirectGraphics/DirectX 9.0.

To the best of my knowledge, there's little point if new features are not 
used. It actually isn't hard to make a `DX version neutral' version of 
Allegro where the DX version can be specified at compile time (I think I 
still have a patch by someone floating around that does that).

> I think that the best solution is to start from scratch and create 
something like "Allegro Millenium Edition".

No. That was attempted and nothing came of it. Rewriting from scratch 
sounds like a good idea on paper but in practice it doesn't work well.

> Now the bullet is in your side, i repeat i am ready to help with a lot of 
effort and work. But i don't want do it alone because it is too much work 
for one man to do it.

Yes, it is. Which goes equally for everyone else. All I can recommend is 
that you take a look at what you think you can manage, ask what ideas and 
proposals are (and what's already been done) and start on it. Because 
people submitting code and updates is the only way anything is going to 
get done.
Experience shows that once someone starts working on things others will 
start working on new things as well.

> If there will no upgrade of Allegro to today optimised code performance. 
Can you then say it me so that i do not loose my time with an already dead 
library. I preffer learn a graphics library that do not slow down my code 
and that use optimised and very fast function like OpenGL or others 
DirectX Wrappers.

First, there is an Allegro extension called AllegroGL that makes Allegro 
and OpenGL work more closely together. Second, an integrated OpenGL driver 
is planned for the next version of Allegro (being developed in the 4.3 
branch). Unfortunately progress has been a bit slow of late due to lack of 
time for everyone.

Evert