| Re: [AD] acodec questions |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
On 2008-12-19, Matthew Leverton <meffer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2) Why is acodec a separate add-on from kcm? It seems like a combined
> allegro-audio.dll would be sufficient since they are essentially
> mutually dependent.
The dependency is one way. I suspect you meant that most people using
kcm_audio will need acodec (or something like it), which is true.
> I think audio in general should remain an add-on
> as many people prefer to just use fmod (etc), but I don't really see
> the need for the split between the two. (Philosophically, yes there's
> a difference between them, but I don't see how it's practical.)
I don't understand the objection to linking with more libraries so I
think the split should remain.
acodec doesn't do that much, but pulls in a fair number of libraries.
It's very easy to duplicate just the subset of acodec functionality that
you want without pulling in all the dependencies. So it is practical to
use kcm_audio but not acodec.
Peter