Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/08/05/04:15:53
lubaldo AT adinet DOT com DOT uy wrote:
> Hello. I personally think that this discussion is a bit off topic but I
> think that lot of people are learning here so they are interested... sorry
> to answer to this thread if you think it is off topic... but is an
> interesant discussion for some people and it is DJGPP-Allegro related
> anyway...
>
> My personal opinions:
>
> Everyone has to start learning from something easy. Many people that
> learns, want to do visual thinks and not only text based programs... so
> what: they are learning, but they cant do complex things like hardware
> access and manipulation, so they have to use a library and Allegro is very
> powerfull and easy at the same time!
true allegro is good for learning... quite good.
>
>
> I have started to learn C with M$ C/C++ 7.0 (not visual)... that compiler
> is ugly.
> In that time I didn't have a modem and a good graphics library (the M$ one
> was very slow). So, started to do my own... started with VGA 320x200...
> then VESA 1.2 in 8bpp... but it was very SLOW and coded in C only... but no
> matter of that I have learned...
> Then I have got a modem and downloaded DJGPP... then Allegro... and
> subscribed to this newsgroup...
> After that time, I have learned much more faster than before and I have
> learned what I think are more usefull things (for what I want to be or try
> to be) than understanding how VESA 1.2 works...
>
> If someone wants to be a game programmer, it has to start learning the
> basics of game programming, it has to learn how to structure very good a
> game, it has to learn good C, etc. But I think that hardware programming
> isn't a very good start... it will not teach you very much of C, it will
> not teach you very much of structured programming or AI. If you are very
> good at hardware programming and not good at game programming, if you do a
> game, you will end with a game that has a good technology and good frame
> rate but is not fun and not good in what it has to do. If you are very good
> at game programming but not in hardware, you can do a good game no matter
> of that.
true i suppose an opinion would be based on what the person is actually trying to do..
>
>
> If someone wants to be a hardware programmer or engines/libraries
> programmer, it has to learn good C and assembly and if it wants to do 3d it
> has to learn very good mathematics, and it has to do its own grafix library
> and such... But because you have to learn good C and if you want to do
> visual programming and not only text based... Allegro comes again as a good
> choice to start learning.
>
> So, I think that there are 2 choices to take... or if you want to be or
> learn the 2 things, I think it is better to start from the 1st one (using
> other's libs) and then follow with the 2nd one, after you learn how to
> program very good.
>
>
> So, I think Merlin, that if you are a good programmer and you like
> hardware programming, you have to do your own libraries, because that will
> teach you more. But if you want to be a game programmer only... maybe it is
> not necessary to go that far... anyway if you go that far you will learn
> more, but doing your libraries as the first step is not good, learn how to
> program good and then do the libraries. Anyway, at the university they
> teach how to code hardware (Ok, I also think that it is better to learn by
> hobby than in the university, since if you learn by your own, you learn
> faster and better...) and I think that if someone codes and is learning for
> hobby, it has to do what it wants to do, if you don't want to do a graphic
> library or want to do other things first, then do that things and not do
> the library and leave that part for more in advance.
>
>
> Also, if someone does a game with Allegro and lot of others libs, that no
> matters, it has done the GAME, thats not easy (depends on the game) and if
> the game is good, it is showing a good skill of the programmer of that game.
> Shawn has done Allegro, and OK, that shows that Shawn has a good skill.
> But that doesn't mean that Shawn can do good games (I am taking that as an
> example, Shawn actually DOES good games).
> So, both examples shows different skills on different things but that
> doesn't mean that Shawn is better programmer than that game programmer or
> that that game programmer is a better programmer than Shawn; they are good
> in what they do.
> So, if you do a game using lots of libs, you don't have to feel like a bad
> programmer.
this is right... no matter what you do it still requires skill.
>
>
> If you do a good game and a good library... you are a very good programmer
> indeed. But remember: time is short... would you have time to do both
> things? Do something like Allegro takes a lot of work and time and do a
> good game also needs time and work...
>
> Ok, that are my opinions to share with anyone. You may think different.
> This is to discuss only and arrive to some conclusion or never arrive to
> some conclusion but maybe this will serve to see that actually many people
> thinks different but no one has all the reason.
Thanks for your opinion... it was quite interesting..
Merlin.
> Finally: sorry to post a so big semi-offtopic or totally-offtopic letter...
>
>
> Goodbye!
>
> Ivan Baldo:
> lubaldo AT adinet DOT com DOT uy - http://members.xoom.com/baldo - ICQ 10215364
> Phone: (598) (2) 613 3223.
> Caldas 1781, Malvin, Montevideo, Uruguay, South America.
>
> (If you have problems with the previous addresses, try this ones:
> ibaldo AT usa DOT net, http://baldo.home.ml.org).
- Raw text -