[SDL] SDL 2.0 API stabilization

Jared Maddox absinthdraco at gmail.com
Mon Mar 4 21:04:38 PST 2013


> Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2013 22:21:02 -0500
> From: "Ryan C. Gordon" <icculus at icculus.org>
> To: SDL Development List <sdl at lists.libsdl.org>
> Subject: Re: [SDL] SDL 2.0 API stabilization
> Message-ID: <5134131E.6060101 at icculus.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 3/3/13 12:09 AM, Sik the hedgehog wrote:
>> Yeah, that seems better. I realized later that SDL_INIT_TOUCH would
>> result in programs using SDL_INIT_EVERYTHING to not get emulated touch
>> input, but I was away by then :/ (honestly using SDL_INIT_EVERYTHING
>> isn't a good idea in the first place, but eh)
>
> Actually, that's a good point: should we nuke SDL_INIT_EVERYTHING from
> SDL 2.0?
>
> I mean, if we add a new subsystem, and someone has written...
>
>     if (SDL_Init(SDL_INIT_EVERYTHING) == -1)
>         exit(1);
>
> ...then their working program might break when they don't have some
> exotic new functionality on their platform.
>

We could have a function that just returns the newest value for
SDL_INIT_EVERYTHING, but then we'd have to load SDL before SDL_Init()
even gets called. Unless you want to separate the loading stage and
the initialization stage, *_EVERYTHING should be either removed... or
changed to a discrete bit flag like all of the other init flags.

Probably it should just be removed.


> Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2013 22:23:04 -0500
> From: "Ryan C. Gordon" <icculus at icculus.org>
> To: SDL Development List <sdl at lists.libsdl.org>
> Subject: Re: [SDL] SDL 2.0 API stabilization
> Message-ID: <51341398.2010406 at icculus.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>

> ...while I'm thinking about it, should we roll SDL_INIT_HAPTIC and
> SDL_INIT_GAMECONTROLLER into SDL_INIT_JOYSTICK?
>

Don't some mice have haptic capabilities (I half-recall magazine ads)?
Other than that, it makes sense to me.



More information about the SDL mailing list