Reply-To: <arfa AT clara DOT net>
From: "Arthur" <arfa AT clara DOT net>
To: "DJGPP Mailing List" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>,
        "Merlin" <merlin__ AT geocities DOT com>
Subject: RE: allegro == or != programming
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 15:34:52 +0100
Message-ID: <000e01bdbe22$b64ff1e0$914e08c3@arthur>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <35C42D12.C9D01BA1@geocities.com>
Precedence: bulk

> I am just curious on what most people think about allegro....
> Not to put down allegro or anything (it does have it's uses) but isn't
> it sort-of like cheating in a way? I mean, it's like having all the
> important stuff done for you... the only thing required is an idea
> (although this is sometimes the hardest part)...

Yes. I still believe that you should have an understanding of what goes on. I
developed my own libraries, but found that it was so similar to certain Allegro
routines that it wasn't worth me developing it much further. I can still better a few
of Allegro's routines, but the ease of use makes it a joy to write in C. If you're a
beginner to C, then Allegro really is a brilliant way to learn it if nothing else,
because it allows you to concentrate on what you want your game to be like, rather
than be put off because you can't do certain things like set a VESA 3 mode...

> I guess allegro is ok for a hobbist programmer and for learning, but for
> people who want to program for a living... It seems as if they are
> trying to take a shortcut.

Not so. It's cheating in the same way that using DirectX for Windows is cheating.
Besides, why re-invent the wheel each time. If a programmer can better Allegro's
routines, then they can use tham instead.

> Like they are not interested in learning
> anything but the syntax of a programming language or just plain too lazy
> to actually do it themselves...

Yes, but time is limited. You can't do anything. And find a game that doesn't use
some kind of API. The only people who write games without APIs are almost always demo
programmers.

> In my opinion if you are going to take
> these kinds of shortcuts it you may as well just ask another programmer
> to make your program for you... That may seem as though i am calling
> people who use allegro lazy or stupid but this is not true, most are
> probably perfectly capable programmers (i have even used allegro a few
> times, even though i feel like i'm not actually making the program
> myself)...

What I do is add to my library when I can do something, and incorporate it into my
game. I use Allegro when I don't know how to do something (and often look at the
Allegro source to see what's really happening).

Note that you don't just use Allegro if you don't know how to do something. That's
like saying "why use libc's stricmp function when you can write your own?"

> Anyway, I just thought i'd get everyone's opinion on this (at
> least everone who answers)...

I have a feeling that it's going to start a war...

Using Allegro is not a bad thing. It does not mean that you are a bad programmer if
you use Allegro. Are you a bad programmer for including libc functions in your
programs? Allegro allows you to concentrate on the important bits of your game -
making it enjoyable. It's also pretty fast.

And in answer to the header of this message, programming.allegro

James Arthur
jaa AT arfa DOT clara DOT net
ICQ#15054819