On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 01:47:11 UTC, ZombineDev wrote:
I wanted to make a D image library, based on the same ideas,
but so far I haven't had enogh time to do this.
The ae.graphics library design is quite effective (flexible and
easy to use/apply) and is all about getting the job done. On
the other hand Boost GIL is more about systematic abstraction
of the domain area, i.e. more academic. I'm not sure if a more
pragmatic or more theoretical approach is better, but even only
porting GIL to D would be great showcase of D's modeling power.
Here's a video [2] and a design guide [3] that exaplain the
motivation behind GIL:
I watched the first half of the video, and although I did get a
few good ideas for ae.utils.graphics, I wouldn't say it's all
that different. Why do you say GIL takes a more academic approach?
One thing I noticed is just how much GIL works around C++
language limitations. I think a direct translation wouldn't be
suitable for D.
