Progress on Adam Wilson's Graphics API?

[ketmar via Digitalmars-d]

On Sun, 31 May 2015 02:35:22 +1200, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

> Personally I think it is more reasonable to assume certain libraries
> will be installed. Such as for Windows user32 and GDI.
> Where by there is no real alternatives. Like X11 for *nix.
> In other words, system libraries are fine to use. As you have no real
> choice in the matter.

while you are right about windows GDI, with GNU/Linux you can find, for 
example, wayland or DirectFB setup without X11 emulation layer at all. so 
assuming that X11 is always there is not exactly right.

> Now SDL on the other hand, you cannot assume will be installed or
> available. Unless you want to go bundling that or using static
> libraries. Still defeats the purpose of expanding D's library base.

installing wide-known libraries is very easy on most modern OSes. the 
biggest mistake community can do is start rewriting *everything* in D for 
the sake of "some user might need that so we have to have that, written 
in D". that is what C interop does: allows us to reuse already written 
and debugged code.

but i can agree that more wrappers and more system API coverage in 
distribution bundle will be fine. now, for example, one can't do more or 
less serious windows programming with DMD "out of the box". *that* is the 
problem, not absense of some 3rd-party library.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20150530/2a2e6da7/attachment.sig>