Asphyre Sphinx 3.0.0 has been released.

[azrael11]

Yes. Examples on Windows have been precompiled in 32-bit, but on Linux they have been precompiled in 64-bit.

Linux support relies on TOpenGLControl from Lazarus components for creating GLX context. This means that multisampling settings don't work there yet and there could be some key weirdness when using GUI interfaces. The problem was that I couldn't find a way to extract X-window ID from Lazarus window handle to use proper GLX device. If someone knows how to do that, I can implement direct OpenGL context creation in native fashion.

Lifepower the windows isn't compiling with 32 bit ... the builds is 64 bit...

[LP]

Lifepower the windows isn't compiling with 32 bit ... the builds is 64 bit...

You are right, sorry. There are 5 different example sets, 3 for Lazarus on all three platforms and 2 for Delphi. Delphi executables are 32-bit, Lazarus executables are 64-bit except those on Mac OS X. I've updated examples to use relative paths in the trunk, along with some other features. An update will be released soon.

[User137]

Is it intended that Asphyre is under MPL license?

http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/

If You distribute Covered Software in Executable Form then:

such Covered Software must also be made available in Source Code Form, as described in Section 3.1, and You must inform recipients of the Executable Form how they can obtain a copy of such Source Code Form by reasonable means in a timely manner, at a charge no more than the cost of distribution to the recipient; and...

I mean, i went with MIT license for nxPascal to give permission for game programmers to make also commercial projects.

It's parts like this in source code that i dislike:

// If you modify/use this code or one of its parts either in original or
// modified form, you must comply with Mozilla Public License v1.1,
// specifically section 3, "Distribution Obligations". Failure to do so will
// result in the license breach, which will be resolved in the court.

It doesn't sound like fully open source, even though you do must retain rights for your source.

Can i copy parts of it to nxPascal or not i wonder. Wouldn't want to reinvent the wheel.

[LP]

Is it intended that Asphyre is under MPL license?

Yes, under MPL 1.1 license. I don't see why can't you distribute commercial projects, as long as you provide full credits and mention location to original Asphyre framework. You need to provide source code only for any derivative works. It seems that MPL 2.0 is more enforced in this terms, but you can choose whether to stick with MPL 1.1 or with MPL 2.0.

It doesn't sound like fully open source, even though you do must retain rights for your source.

MPL is an open-source license. Asphyre framework, its tools and all related content are copyright protected. It is not, however, available for public domain, as it does have intellectual property rights, which must be not be violated.

In any case, it is not unreasonable, assuming that you get a free and polished product, which you can use to create commercial projects, and the only thing you need to give in return is to provide credits for the framework and its author(s).

In my understanding, MIT license only protects itself but not the actual author: MIT license and its statement propagates easily, while author rights are eventually dissolved. I think it is most applicable to software that is intended to be illegal or violate some laws, so it is easily distributed yet remain more or less anonymous. One such example would be a P2P content sharing tool. I wouldn't recommend it for nxPascal project.

Can i copy parts of it to nxPascal or not i wonder. Wouldn't want to reinvent the wheel.

You can, provided that MPL license is complied with.

By the way, I have checked your project and it seems promising. Sorry for not checking it earlier, but I've been in a hurry and thought that "nxPascal" was like a new compiler or something. Indeed, there are many parts where you could reuse a lot of Asphyre: vector math, types, functions, GUI, not to mention the fact that you use same DGL OpenGL headers. Any reason why can't you build nxPascal on top of Asphyre, or as an extension of thereof, such as a combined project or something? (Especially now when it is on SVN.) Asphyre solves a lot of low-level tedious problems, while you could focus on actual high-level 3D stuff.

[User137]

In my understanding, MIT license only protects itself but not the actual author: MIT license and its statement propagates easily, while author rights are eventually dissolved. I think it is most applicable to software that is intended to be illegal or violate some laws, so it is easily distributed yet remain more or less anonymous. One such example would be a P2P content sharing tool. I wouldn't recommend it for nxPascal project.

That does make me reconsider... If it would give more protection to nxPascal, while keeping it open source and available to different purposes, then i'd see the change beneficial.

Any reason why can't you build nxPascal on top of Asphyre, or as an extension of thereof, such as a combined project or something? (Especially now when it is on SVN.) Asphyre solves a lot of low-level tedious problems, while you could focus on actual high-level 3D stuff.

It is interesting offer, however i feel like current nxPascal might be more lightweight and faster in many areas It should be modular enough to be able to be used with Asphyre though. I could try make demo sometime where these 2 engines are merged together in 1 project. My first game engine was trying to expand on DelphiX, creating a visual component on form for game window. Later decided it was bad approach and went with something more generic, that doesn't need any components installed. That is why it can blend with any engine. Clashes can come with math and types though, but propably not much.

I was interested in quaternions today, but found also source from Irrlicht engine. That and implementing operator overloading for fpc for vector, matrix and quaternion math. nxPascal should work on most Lazarus versions (with all operating systems), and possibly Delphi 3 or 5 onwards.

[LP]

It is interesting offer, however i feel like current nxPascal might be more lightweight and faster in many areas

Err, I wouldn't make such claims before doing any performance benchmarks first.

Lightweight characteristic is also debatable as Asphyre uses nothing but its own features with the only exception being its GUI framework. Typical Asphyre-based applications compiled in Delphi 2007 occupy less than 700 Kb. (Check its compiled examples in "\Examples\Delphi2007\").

Delphi 2009+ and FPC/Lazarus applications are bigger due to Unicode in first case and LCL in the second one. Neither of those are related to Asphyre itself.

If you are referring to Asphyre's reliance on VCL/LCL application types, they are both great frameworks and people use them. In your case, as long as you rely on GLUT, your code is not so "lightweight" either.

nxPascal should work on most Lazarus versions (with all operating systems), and possibly Delphi 3 or 5 onwards.

I can understand the point regarding Delphi, as purchasing different Delphi versions can be expensive, but I don't see any reason why you wouldn't use latest official FPC/Lazarus version as long as it is not broken or something (and even in this case, you can update from trunk rather than keep using some outdated version).

[AirPas]

finally Asphyre for lazarus , how about the performance i mean between lazarus and delphi which one produce fast code ! , in my machine delphi is faster but just 4 or 5% iam sure with FPC 2.7.1 the result would be much faster , due to the new optimization O4.
in lazarus it would be better if you define the paths like so :
..\..\..\..\Source;..\..\..\..\Source\Providers;.. \..\..\..\Source\Headers;..\..\..\..\Source\GUI


thanks for the update and keep it up