Mail Archives: djgpp/2000/03/26/18:58:34
David Green wrote:
>
> Thanks for the advice, all.
>
> Well, the main reason for the switch, which i prolly should have mentioned
> in the initial post is that i'm having SERIOUS trauma accessing SVGA and
> sound hardware well enough when running under NT. Unfortunately, although
> i've been developing on win98, i must demonstrate this at college, which
> uses NT. I had hoped allegro would handle all of this for me, but it appears
> that even allegro has problems under NT. So this left me a choice, since i'd
> ideally like to carry on using allegro and re-use as much, if not all of my
> code. Windoze or Linux... since allegro apparently ports to both and college
> will support both environments. i'm just trying to ascertain which will
> involve the least amount of hassle. my preference, since my degree depends
> on this being a good decision, is to go with linux, and not let micro$oft
> have _any_ bearing on the outcome of my degree !!
>
> > Have you used DOS specific features (not available in Linux) or GCC
> > specific features (not available in MSVC)? Or both? ;-)
>
> I don't think there's any platform specific stuff... I've let allegro handle
> all that (keyboard / mouse interrupt stuff), so i'm hoping since allegro is
> portable, my code should be, to some extent, also.
That it is. For the last two years I've been developing with my own
DOS-based library, and SDL for Linux and Windows. This required a
number of platform-dependent modules and a great deal of string and
patches to hold it together.
Porting it to use Allegro instead has given me a single codebase that
compiles in both DOS and Linux.. Windows I will try out later.
> Now as to using GCC specific features not available in MSVC, i'm _really_
> unsure... I remember the last time i battled with MSVC there were lots of
> subtle language differences which kept tripping me up, but i can't for the
> life of me remember what the differences are between msvc's interpretation
> and gcc's... since i've got a very limited time scope left for this i'd
> rather not introduce risks of language inconsistency. so sticking with gcc
> seems to be a real bonus.
There is of course a GCC for Windows, although I found it uncomfortably buggy.
The alternative is to use #ifdef to separate the GCC and MSVC stuff.
Mainly this was caused by different header names.
> Well, thanks for all the advice guys. it looks like the best bet will be to
> try linux out; i've read that allegro on linux is in a really good state at
> the minute. just wanted to canvas opinion and make sure there were no
> horrible pitfalls waiting for me round the next corner!!
>
> cheers,
> David.
--
JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- DOUG-15 AT bigfoot DOT com
Fun things to do with the Ultima games (http://ithe.cjb.net)
Developing a U6/U7 clone (http://fly.to/ire)
d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!8!KA u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB----
uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976)
- Raw text -