On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Stuffed Crust wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 11:50:51PM -0000, Brian Buff wrote:
> > I don't really see any reason not to just use plain old Windows GDI. Would
> > DirectDraw _really_ be neccisary for an old 16 colour game? To top it off,
> > GDI shouldn't really add any more time to the compile than a printf
> > function.
>
> Compile time is moot in the grand scheme of things.
On my measly little Pentium 133 laptop (my only dev machine at the
moment), it really does decrease my productivity. I get the point, though.
> So, you're more than welcome to write a GDI driver, but it's a whole lot of
> development time for something that is largely irrelevant, when DDraw and SDL(which
> uses DDraw) do what we need far faster and with much simpler code.
The problem is that the DirectDraw driver doesn't work very well and/or is
incomplete. Should we have it compiled in, even though it doesn't provide
enough functionality for things to be playable?
Perhaps we should revisit this when we are nearing release to see if
anyone steps up to fix it. If no one fixes it by then, I think we should
temporarily remove it from being compiled.
Comments?
--
http://www.clock.org/~matt
