Community Engine Announcement Discussions

[Mirage]

In my opinion the most reasonable way to switch renderer is to change a conditional define. As only one renderer implementation can be in use at a time. Others will just waste memory being included in binary.
For a typical API-specific or OS-specific module - there is always API (OS) agnostic part. So this part can be in a base class and specific part in a descendant one.

Concerning other languages - what languages are in question?
Even if we'll use procedural approach this will allow only C/C++. Not Java or C#. As these languages can't use native data structures (not sure about C#).

[Super Vegeta]

For almost any language, C is the first thing you want to be able to interface with, so if we manage to create a proper interface accessible from C, bindings to other languages can build on that.

As for graphics, I stand by my words regarding OGL >= 3.0. Regarding DX, although I won't mind anyone devoting their time to writing DX rendering, I'm slightly concerned whether such "doubling" of features won't be an unnecessary spending of manhours.

Regarding OS integration - are we planning on using native APIs, or go with some library like SDL or Allegro? The latter may be a bit limiting, but then again, I think writing the OS interaction code from scratch (or copy-pasting and stitching it together) is reinventing the wheel much.

[de_jean_7777]

For almost any language, C is the first thing you want to be able to interface with, so if we manage to create a proper interface accessible from C, bindings to other languages can build on that.

This can be done separately from the pgdce. I personally have no interest in providing C integration.

Regarding OS integration - are we planning on using native APIs, or go with some library like SDL or Allegro? The latter may be a bit limiting, but then again, I think writing the OS interaction code from scratch (or copy-pasting and stitching it together) is reinventing the wheel much.

As with other things, this should be separated as much as possible so that it can be replaced (input, window creation, ...). And yeah, one should not reinvent a wheel, even though I'd prefer as much of the functionality to be done in pascal. SDL2 is preferable since it seems much more active.

[Rodrigo Robles]

Thinking about the real implementation, we should plan something using incremental iteraction, having a big plan but starting with the minimum features to have something usable briefly.

To the great plan we can be megalomaniac and support many kinds of platforms, 3D file formats and so on. Since we advance step by step on implementation.