Re: [AD] 5.0.0 final release plan

[Evert Glebbeek <eglebbk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2 Jan 2011, at 13:12 , Peter Hull wrote:
> That looks OK for ALLEGRO_SYSTEM_DATA_PATH; a5teroids does work now
> with this patch *and* with al_get_standard_path(ALLEGRO_PROGRAM_PATH)
> replaced by al_get_standard_path(ALLEGRO_SYSTEM_DATA_PATH) in
> Game.cpp. However I don't know if this would break every other
> platform?

That's a good question.
It depends on how we think things should be organised in the demo program. I don't think ALLEGRO_PROGRAM_PATH is ever really intended to be used to locate game data in an actual program that people want to install (that's what the data paths are for), which essentially is what an application bundle is. However, the demo might be written with the idea that the executable and the data are placed in the same directory, in which case ALLEGRO_PROGRAM_PATH is what you want (even if it is bad style for a demo program without a big fat comment saying why you shouldn't do it that way and why we're doing it anyway). In that case, however, trying to stick everything in an application bundle is not appropriate because there you *don't* want to put everything in the same directory.

Any thoughts on this?

> I think you're right about dropping the last component. I can't really
> think of a use for those two, but does ALLEGRO_EXENAME_PATH have to
> point to the real executable or not?

That's the question. In the source, there's a comment that explicitly says we return the location of the bundle "because that's probably what's expected". Personally I can't think of a reason why I'd want to know either the path to the bundle or the location of the executable within the bundle.

Evert