Re: [AD] Proposal to drop DOS port from Allegro 4

[Laurence W. <lwi...@lw...>]

In reply to Clayton Weaver <vgd...@ho...>:
>I propose, and a lot seem to agree, that DOS should be dropped from=20
>Allegro.

Sorry, but check out the poll on allegro.cc. Over 50% of people say that
DOS shouldn't be dropped. So even if you were going for a majority vote,
you have lost.

> It should be dropped for several reasons. Firstly, the programmers=20
>mainly only use DOS because they are used to it.

I mainly use a C compiler/text editor when programming PICs because I'm
used to it. I could also program them directly in binary, but I don't
want to.

> Secondly, Windows has=20
>gotten rid of DOS from Windows 2000 and up.

So? Windows isn't the only thing at stake here. I for one will always
stay at Win98. And what about people who don't use Windows?

> Thirdly, the DOS port is greatly=20
>limiting what Allegro could possibly do.

No it's not. Just because (for instance) display switching can't be
implemented on DOS, it hasn't stopped Eric and Peter implementing it on
other platforms. The same goes for any feature you care to add
(multithreading, which BTW does work because pthreads is ported to
DJGPP; 3D acceleration; etc).

> Finally, there is a great Windows=20
>compiler (Dev-C++) which is free and easy to learn to use.

Fair enough, but there is also a great DOS compiler, with a mature
toolset (so mature, in fact, that I don't use any of the Windows stuff
at all), and none of this messing-about-with-the-mouse rubbish.

> DOS is obselete=20
>or rapidly becoming obsolete and should be dropped from Allegro before the=
=20
>Allegro project suffers. By suffers I mean before it loses users becuase=20
>they can't play the games for compatibility in Windows.

Having the ability to compile Allegro programs under DOS won't kill
Allegro off.

Bye for now,
--=20
Laurence Withers, lwi...@lw...
                http://www.lwithers.demon.co.uk/