[SDL] SDL 1.3 status ?
miston.drirr at gmail.com
Wed Jul 27 19:29:09 PDT 2011
On 07/27/2011 07:00 PM, Mason Wheeler wrote:
> Yes, please. And while we're at it, can we please finally remove
> support for the non-accelerated
> rendering backends that are holding SDL back?
> I'm sure the desktop Linux folks will raise a big hue and cry about it
> again because they can't seem
> to get working OpenGL drivers in a lot of cases, but the fact of the
> matter is, desktop Linux is
> irrelevant because the actual users are simply not using it. The
> serious platforms today are
> Windows (guaranteed D3D and GL in 99%+ of all cases), mobile *nix
> (guaranteed GLES on all
> platforms I'm aware of) and, to a much lesser extent, OSX (guaranteed
> GL in all cases). Desktop
> Linux *still* has less than 1% market share, and only a fraction of
> that tiny fraction actually cares
> about gaming. And for them, there's still SDL 1.2.
> It makes no sense to let a tiny fraction of a percent hold SDL 1.3/2.0
> back from implementing
> modern rendering features.
I support getting rid of the compatibility layer because there's no need
to have something that is "like SDL 1.2, but not quite" specially
because there's the real SDL 1.2 which can be used instead. I'd also say
removing non-accelerated rendering back ends would be good, but I would
keep at least some support for compositing / slicing surfaces.
Now, about desktop Linux. Probably you don't use it, but that doesn't
make it irrelevant. The support for OpenGL on Linux is much better than
it was a few years ago, and will very likely only improve in the future,
so I see no point in crippling SDL by not supporting Linux.
Please remember SDL isn't only for the hardcore gamer. Many applications
have been written using SDL, and I'm sure many more would benefit from
features in SDL 1.3, like multiple windows, even if the OpenGL they're
running on isn't blazing fast.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the SDL