Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/12/26/14:03:50
bowman wrote:
>
> Arthur wrote:
> >
> > RSXNTDJ does have the problem of not being able to compile C++ all
> > that well, which limits its functionality with the Windows API.
>
> It is not necessary to use C++ for Windows API programming. I do it both
> ways, and prefer C. Unless you want to use MFC, there is little to be
> gained by C++.
>
> Also, there is no problem accessing COM objects in C, which opens up the
> entire DirectX set of tools. OpenGL is also usable.
>
> This is not meant to be a putdown of Allegro or WinAllegro. I am not a
> gamer, and really don't appreciate graphics programming, so I can't
> really evaluate the relative merits of each approach. If I were to, I'd
> seriously look at OpenGL or DirectX, if only that there is a lot more
> mainstream literature supporting either of these packages.
>
> On the Cygwin/MinGw32/rsxntdj choice: I believe Cygwin still requires a
> hefty .dll to ship with the app, while MinGw32 uses the native MS dll's.
> MinG does produce free code, while Cygwin might get into GPL
> complications. I've found rsxntdj will produce extremely small
> executables, compared to either of the above. I hope I am not fooling
> myself, and rsxnt stashed a huge dll someplace, but a minimal generic
> window with menu, tool and status bars weighs in a 8K versus 480K for
> MinG.
8k is about the same as lcc-win32, which should be able to compile winallegro
with a minimal amount of porting, if those dx headers are sorted properly.
I'm suprised at the MinG size, as it relies on crtdll.dll which provides the
entire c runtime. This seems very strange.
Cygnus is covered by the GPL, or Berkely style licence I believe.
Peter Allen
- Raw text -