[SDL] DirectX 7?

Neil Griffiths n.griffiths at virgin.net
Thu Sep 26 17:24:00 PDT 2002


DM> I'm not sure if this has been covered but my main gripe with having to use 
DM> 3D API's for 2D games is the stupid texture size limit. It makes creating 
DM> interfaces painful and older machines are not supported. If you guys can get 
DM> around the texture size limit I wouldn't care what API was used.

Of course. It's not hard. SDL would just have to split up the texture
into 256x256 (or whatever) sized textures without your knowledge.
You'd have your normal surface and wouldn't have to know about it. You
can look at the DirectGraphics examples I linked to earlier today to
see how that work or take a look at David's glSDL code.

DM> One other thing I forgot to mention is in 2D games I like to be able to
DM> manipulate indivdual pixels in the images. Would this still be possible 
DM> using the 3D API?

Yes, there would be no point otherwise. However, don't get stuck
thinking that it's a 3D API. It isn't, you'd still be treating it as
2D. It's just that SDL itself would be using the features of your 3D
card to draw the graphics. Hell, something nice would be fake
anti-aliasing which would be to render at 800x600 and to scale down to
and display at 640x480 - and this could be done in hardware. :)

And in reply to Patrick from before... :)

PM> Hmm, yeah, I kinda wish sdl 2.0 had everything in software so in the long run
PM> all of this wouldnt matter. Exploit what you can with hardware APIs, if you
PM> cant, fall back to an internal software routine. 

Right, that's what I've been saying all along. There wouldn't be
anything extra that would be done because of the OpenGL or DX8
targets. There would always be a software fall-back for people who
don't have those - and GDI needs to be there. DirectX7 would also be
nice, I'll admit, but there's going to be a lot of work done there...
It's just that we can take advantage of modern hardware and I believe
we should do that!


More information about the SDL mailing list