Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/01/20/07:46:23
> On Thu, 08 Jan 1998 08:30:42 GMT in comp.os.msdos.djgpp yorka AT dlc DOT fi
wrote:
> : nowadays. Looks like nobody can even find their socks without Allegro.
> : I suggest learning everything "the hard way" (a lot of
> : experimenting/practicing) and using fancy-pants libs ONLY AFTER you
> : would be quite capable of writing similar libs by yourself.
Why re-invent the wheel when I could never do it better? It may give you
more knowledge about the ins and outs of svga programming, but what if you
don't want to know how to program the svga cards (being the hellish lot
they are). I believe most people use Allegro to get the gfx results they
want quickly and efficiently, without having to waste months designing and
programming and debugging their own. I want the knowledge of game
programming, not the knowledge of programming svga cards, especially when
Windows/DirectX/Xlib and the rest are out there.
[George Foot wrote:]
> But what if you haven't a clue where to start? The function list
> tells you what functions are available, but how can you know what
> order to put them in? Sure, you can derive the whole theory of game
> programming from first principles (the function list), but it's far
> simpler to learn roughly the sort of things you might want to do from
> other peope. Then you have some building blocks with which to make
> your first games. Once you've mastered that, you figure out new ways
> to combine the functions to do more things.
Here I agree. I have yet any reason to rewrite any of allegro's gfx
functions, but they are basically perfect as they are. The only library
functions I use of Allegros are the gfx and sound, the datafile and the
keyboard/mouse/timer and low level gui functions. The rest of the library
doesn't interest me. Gfx or any hardware programming is the uttermost pits
for me in programming, as the change so quickly and are terribly fickle
about getting things right. I would much rather do some software
programming and leave the hardware programming to others
> : Sure you could/would get quick results by starting
> : out with a lib but then you wouldn't really learn anything. Besides,
> : the wonderful little example programs only introduce you to the
> : Allegro lib, they won't teach you shit.
No, they won't teach you about gfx programming or sound programming, but if
you don't want to and don't like to program hardware, Allegro takes a huge
load of your back so you can do something you really want to learn and
allows you to give the UI of your program a lovely graphical interface
> : the lineto/moveto stuff yourself, it's quite simple really. But if
> : you're just too lazy or impatient to code something yourself, then I
> : can only say that you will never get beyond the basics in game
I agree that lineto/moveto is really something you should do yourself, as
it is trivial.
> : programming. Game programming is _hard_ and learning it takes a lot of
> : time, patience and motivation. Don't get discouraged if things don't
> : work like you expect them to, just try again and type 'till your
> : fingertips are bleeding. Unless you're ready to go through all this,
> : you will never become a game programmer. Period.
True, even with the Allegro library game programming is damn hard. If
allegro wasn't around, I bet at least half the game programmers using djgpp
will not be here. I repeat, having a gfx and sound library is a great time
saver but does NOT make game programming any easier.
Happy programming :)
Jamie Love
Part of the Silicon Wanderers
(http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Horizon/4532)
e-mail me at jamie DOT love AT clear DOT net DOT nz
- Raw text -