| Re: [AD] proposed changes to sound API |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
- To: "Coordination of admins/developers of the game programming library Allegro" <alleg-developers@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [AD] proposed changes to sound API
- From: "Matthew Leverton" <meffer@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 23:28:44 -0600
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 11:08 PM, Evert Glebbeek <eglebbk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 17-Dec-08, at 12:02 AM, Matthew Leverton wrote:
>> Is that to replace the current al_get_sample* or to supplement them?
>
> Opinions are divided on the subject. ;)
>
I don't think Allegro should pretend to be Java or some elaborate
object-oriented system.
bool playing;
if (al_get_sample_instance_bool(splinst, ALLEGRO_AUDIOPROP_PLAYING,
&playing) == 0 && playing == false)
{
// sample instance is not playing
}
vs.
if (!al_is_sample_instance_playing(splinst))
{
// sample instance is not playing
}
My vote is for the latter version because I don't see Allegro's audio
system ever getting much more advanced than it currently is.
However, if somebody is going to be adding dozens and dozens of minor
properties, then I think the current system is better equipped to
handle that. (But I'd still probably want functions for the major
properties anyway...)
--
Matthew Leverton