Re: [AL] Allegro's future, really

[Arthur H. <art...@fr...>]

On Sun, 23 May 2004 13:33:24 +0200
Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz <gr...@ti...> wrote:

> I'm not really sure about that, as I can see two other systems which are
> also complex but hidden behind a nice interface layer. One is the
> configure machinery. It is a pain to write and maintain, but Unix end
> users can happily download, ./configure && make and install and that's
> it. Linux package managers are equally complicated systems which in the
> case of Debian are hidden behind simple "apt-get" commands.

Both work almost correctly (almost because of the autoconf/make/header difficulty).
This proves for sure that it is POSSIBLE to write such a system for allegro.
But, whatever easy [is this english correct ?] it would be, this would add a step
before coding/running the game. This is a high cost - that has to be justified 
by the things brought to the lib with it. I mean, is modularity THAT important ? 

When I started allegro in July, I found great to be able to write my first allegro program 
in about 15 minutes, including the library compilation and installation. (under windows at this time,
I switched to slackware linux 2 months later)

I've nothing against this idea of modularity, but this must be done carefully. Not like SDL 
(or GNU autotools :p). 


-- 
Greetings, 
A.H.