The BGT argument is one I have scene a few times on this list now. It seams what we need then is all the functions of BGT wrapped up in a nice platform independent library. It could be written in something like portable C, with all the platform dependent stuff in platform specific modules, and bindings for different languages generated with Swig or something. Swig is quite good at generating bindings for many programming languages.
Note: I'm not volunteering to write it, just want to get the debate going. Thoughts? Rynhardt On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Damien Garwood <dam...@dcpendleton.plus.com > wrote: > Hi, > BGT might come with many conveniences. But it also lacks many others. It > also isn’t indicative of real world programming. Once you realise BGT’s > limitations and want to move away from it, it’s much harder to do so > because you end up relying on it. Especially if you’re a programming newbie > and don’t have a clue how to write audio engines, let alone audio engines > that can play multiple file types, whether packed or on disk, whether > encrypted or open. Not to mention keyboard, mouse, joystick support, > screenreader and SAPI support, timers, pathfinders, combination generators > and calendars. The way I see it, scripting with something like BGT is like > having an overprotective clingy parent that just won’t let go, whereas > programming something like C++ or Python wants you to bend down and kiss > its furry rosy smelling derriere before you can get it to work. > Talking from experience here. > Cheers. > Damien. > > *From:* Josh Kennedy <joshknnd1...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Sunday, February 18, 2018 2:54 PM > *To:* firstname.lastname@example.org > *Subject:* Re: [blind-gamers] accessible game engine > > You could use BGT blind game maker toolkit, from BlastBay studios. It's > free. > > >