[SDL] Re: SDL_SolidIcosahedron() and other platonics

[David Hedbor]

Sam Lantinga <slouken at devolution.com> writes:

> > >I seriously hope that we'll backport the important new stuff to 1.2
> > >from time to time then. Otherwise it will go the way of 1.0, quickly
> > >being obsolete and ignored by developers (who want/need the features in
> > >1.3).
> 
> > that's probably a good idea, but some new things may be hard to
> > backport if they depend on a new design. On the other hand 1.2 should
> > be considerably more useful than 1.0 was and will be useful for quite
> > some time
> 
> Also, the timeframe for a usable 1.3 release is on the order of 3-6 months
> at the earliest.  I want to take the time to learn from what we've done
> over the past four years and design it right.  It will be a precursor to
> SDL 2.0

Is there any plans for native C++ support in the future of SDL, as
opposed to depending on 3rd party wrapper libs? I haven't followed the
discussions here for quite some time (5000 unread :-), so excuse me if
this has already been discussed.

Is there a roadmap for the future development of SDL somewhere?

-- 
[ Below is a random fortune, which is unrelated to the above message. ]
Doing gets it done.