On 6 February 2014 21:59, <"Ola Fosheim Grøstad\" <[email protected]>"@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, 6 February 2014 at 11:29:35 UTC, Manu wrote: > >> Some that I regularly encounter: system libs, opengl, directx, fmod, >> physics (havok, phyzx, etc), animation (euphoria, natural >> > > And just to nitpick: > > 1. Games are hit or miss with a very short life cycle. This is not > typical. Most software have a life cycle counted in years with contractual > support requirements that can be harsh, not months with very little > possibility of damage claims for the end user. > I don't think you've mage a game recently. Most big games are multi-year projects with teams numbering well in the hundreds, and then downloadable-content (ie, after-market content) is basically a given these days, and often supported by a different team than initially wrote the code. 2. The life cycle of games is porting when your product succeeds. You are > F*CK*D if you don't have source code access and want to port to an emerging > platform, so I believe you can obtain source code for libraries like Havoc > and FMOD for that reason alone. > > I really don't think closed source libraries should be the focus of D if > it prevents having a good infrastructure. > I didn't say they should be a focus, I'm saying they must however be supported.
