allegropro-development — List for developers on AllegroPro

[Allegropro-dev] Current status and progress reports

[Korval <Ko...@co...>]

For the past few weeks, I've been kinda busy with other tasks. However, now
I'm back in a coding-after-work mood, so I'm back.

Right now, I'm working on some basic utility "classes": points, sizes, and
rectangles. Having these in place makes things quite a bit easier.

After that, I'm going to start bringing in Allegro 4 itself. That is,
AllegroPro's init function will initialize Allegro 4. I think the
requirement will be to use some reasonably useful version of the "unstable"
branch, but I'm not entirely positive. The version I have is 4.1.9, but I'm
willing to update it as needed. This is a necessary first step towards
getting the graphics system up and running.

After that, I think I'm going to go through our API headers and start using
Doxygen comments to get our documentation building going. Doxygen doesn't
produce the best documentation, in terms of readability, but I've never
found a better program for generating documentation from comments in files.
And, of course, it's open source, so we can modify the output of it (though
it probably won't be easy).

Now, for the other stuff. How is the MingW port coming along, Ron? While I
did integrate your changes over, I pointed out a number of other places
where you needed to make changes (like having MingW-specific versions of all
the *comp.h and *comp.c files). How's that all coming?

Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release

[Ryan P. <rpa...@cf...>]

On Wednesday 22 September 2004 8:41 am, Peter C O Johansson wrote:
> I think because it is not a requirement in order to compile AllegroPro.
> All you need as an end-user is the makefiles generated by Premake, and
> these can easily be generated and bundled prior to release. Premake is
> really only of interest to people working on AllegroPro, and would add
> bloat to an end distribution.
I like that logic :) I think this is a good move, too.

-- 
Regards,
Ryan Patterson <mailto:rpa...@cf...>

RE: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release

[Korval <Ko...@co...>]

I got some fairly negative response to the idea of having to distribute an
executable to be able to build AllegroPro as well. Some people don't like
the idea of distributing executables, and, as Bob pointed out, it really is
only for building makefiles and projects.

-----Original Message-----
From: all...@li...
[mailto:all...@li...]On Behalf Of
Peter C O Johansson
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 5:42 AM
To: AllegroPro
Subject: Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release



> OK, nevermind. I got it now. So why don't we have this Premake project
> in the zip so the user won't have to dowload Premake?

I think because it is not a requirement in order to compile AllegroPro.
All you need as an end-user is the makefiles generated by Premake, and
these can easily be generated and bundled prior to release. Premake is
really only of interest to people working on AllegroPro, and would add
bloat to an end distribution.

--
Peter C O Johansson



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
_______________________________________________
Allegropro-development mailing list
All...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development

Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release

[Peter C O J. <x-...@mo...>]

> OK, nevermind. I got it now. So why don't we have this Premake project
> in the zip so the user won't have to dowload Premake?

I think because it is not a requirement in order to compile AllegroPro.
All you need as an end-user is the makefiles generated by Premake, and
these can easily be generated and bundled prior to release. Premake is
really only of interest to people working on AllegroPro, and would add
bloat to an end distribution.

-- 
Peter C O Johansson

Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release

[Ron O. <ron...@gm...>]

OK, nevermind. I got it now. So why don't we have this Premake project
in the zip so the user won't have to dowload Premake?

Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release

[Ron O. <ron...@gm...>]

OK, so what runs the Lua file? I can't see any executable. Or maybe
I'm getting it totally wrong and the Lua file should run itself?
Please explain to me.


On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 23:02:15 -0700, Korval <ko...@co...> wrote:
> I thought that I had cleared this up with my post on Allegro.cc.
> 
> There is no Lua install. There is no "has Lua". Lua is an embedded language.
> This means that the interpreter becomes part of the executable that uses it.
> As such, if you have an executable that uses it (like Premake), then you
> have all that you need. It isn't like Python or Perl, where you run a single
> executable that executes the script. Running Premake requires nothing more
> than the Premake executable (that, and the Lua script, of course).
> 
> Also, as it turns out, Premake's source distribution actually ships the Lua
> 4.0.1 distribution. So it comes with everything you need to build it. A good
> thing too. I'm not sure that the 4.0.1 really exists anywhere anymore. Which
> is a good thing, because Lua 5 is much nicer and more consistent.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: all...@li...
> [mailto:all...@li...]On Behalf Of
> Ron Ophir
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 11:05 AM
> To: all...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release
> 
> OK, I'll take a look at it. Maybe we should have an executable that
> would be statically linked to Lua so even if you don't have Lua you
> can run the code? Anyway, you can count on me looking at it (prolly
> tommorow).
> 
> On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 23:08:15 -0700, Korval <ko...@co...> wrote:
> > The makefile was generated by PreMake. I'm not adverse to having a
> specially
> > modified version of Premake (or one we could even get into the actual
> > Premake distribution) that builds a makefile that doesn't require POSIX.
> > Unfortunately, I have no idea how to write one, nor have I taken a serious
> > look at Premake.
> >
> > If you're considering this, don't let the fact that Lua is in use scare
> you
> > off. While Premake does use Lua to build the makefile, all the Lua stuff
> has
> > already happened by the time you get the data. In theory (from what little
> > I've seen of the codebase), you would be making a new --target type
> ('mingw'
> > as opposed to the 'gnu' one. Premake is annoyingly case-sensitive), and
> that
> > target type would receive some form of data structures (likely not Lua
> > objects).
> >
> > I've been thinking about modifying Premake anyway. It has a few slightly
> > annoying habbits, like outputting all the projects into the same folder.
> If
> > you decide to adjust Premake to be able to output POSIX-independent
> > makefiles, let me know so that we can coordinate our Premake changes.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: all...@li...
> > [mailto:all...@li...]On Behalf Of
> > Ryan Patterson
> > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 4:27 AM
> > To: all...@li...
> > Subject: Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release
> >
> > On Monday 20 September 2004 3:22 am, Korval wrote:
> > > However, I can't test it since I don't have a Cygwin environment (the
> > > makefile requires it), nor do I have even the slightest clue as to how
> to
> > > set one up.
> > If you write your dependency files to multiple files rather than just one,
> > you
> > will not need sed to filter them. I'm betting this is your only POSIX
> > dependency, am I right?
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Ryan Patterson <mailto:rpa...@cf...>
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> > Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> > who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> > Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> > _______________________________________________
> > Allegropro-development mailing list
> > All...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> > Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> > who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> > Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> > _______________________________________________
> > Allegropro-development mailing list
> > All...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> _______________________________________________
> Allegropro-development mailing list
> All...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> _______________________________________________
> Allegropro-development mailing list
> All...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development
>

RE: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release

[Korval <Ko...@co...>]

I thought that I had cleared this up with my post on Allegro.cc.

There is no Lua install. There is no "has Lua". Lua is an embedded language.
This means that the interpreter becomes part of the executable that uses it.
As such, if you have an executable that uses it (like Premake), then you
have all that you need. It isn't like Python or Perl, where you run a single
executable that executes the script. Running Premake requires nothing more
than the Premake executable (that, and the Lua script, of course).

Also, as it turns out, Premake's source distribution actually ships the Lua
4.0.1 distribution. So it comes with everything you need to build it. A good
thing too. I'm not sure that the 4.0.1 really exists anywhere anymore. Which
is a good thing, because Lua 5 is much nicer and more consistent.

-----Original Message-----
From: all...@li...
[mailto:all...@li...]On Behalf Of
Ron Ophir
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 11:05 AM
To: all...@li...
Subject: Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release


OK, I'll take a look at it. Maybe we should have an executable that
would be statically linked to Lua so even if you don't have Lua you
can run the code? Anyway, you can count on me looking at it (prolly
tommorow).


On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 23:08:15 -0700, Korval <ko...@co...> wrote:
> The makefile was generated by PreMake. I'm not adverse to having a
specially
> modified version of Premake (or one we could even get into the actual
> Premake distribution) that builds a makefile that doesn't require POSIX.
> Unfortunately, I have no idea how to write one, nor have I taken a serious
> look at Premake.
>
> If you're considering this, don't let the fact that Lua is in use scare
you
> off. While Premake does use Lua to build the makefile, all the Lua stuff
has
> already happened by the time you get the data. In theory (from what little
> I've seen of the codebase), you would be making a new --target type
('mingw'
> as opposed to the 'gnu' one. Premake is annoyingly case-sensitive), and
that
> target type would receive some form of data structures (likely not Lua
> objects).
>
> I've been thinking about modifying Premake anyway. It has a few slightly
> annoying habbits, like outputting all the projects into the same folder.
If
> you decide to adjust Premake to be able to output POSIX-independent
> makefiles, let me know so that we can coordinate our Premake changes.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: all...@li...
> [mailto:all...@li...]On Behalf Of
> Ryan Patterson
> Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 4:27 AM
> To: all...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release
>
> On Monday 20 September 2004 3:22 am, Korval wrote:
> > However, I can't test it since I don't have a Cygwin environment (the
> > makefile requires it), nor do I have even the slightest clue as to how
to
> > set one up.
> If you write your dependency files to multiple files rather than just one,
> you
> will not need sed to filter them. I'm betting this is your only POSIX
> dependency, am I right?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ryan Patterson <mailto:rpa...@cf...>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> _______________________________________________
> Allegropro-development mailing list
> All...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> _______________________________________________
> Allegropro-development mailing list
> All...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development
>


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
_______________________________________________
Allegropro-development mailing list
All...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development

Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release

[Ron O. <ron...@gm...>]

OK, I'll take a look at it. Maybe we should have an executable that
would be statically linked to Lua so even if you don't have Lua you
can run the code? Anyway, you can count on me looking at it (prolly
tommorow).


On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 23:08:15 -0700, Korval <ko...@co...> wrote:
> The makefile was generated by PreMake. I'm not adverse to having a specially
> modified version of Premake (or one we could even get into the actual
> Premake distribution) that builds a makefile that doesn't require POSIX.
> Unfortunately, I have no idea how to write one, nor have I taken a serious
> look at Premake.
> 
> If you're considering this, don't let the fact that Lua is in use scare you
> off. While Premake does use Lua to build the makefile, all the Lua stuff has
> already happened by the time you get the data. In theory (from what little
> I've seen of the codebase), you would be making a new --target type ('mingw'
> as opposed to the 'gnu' one. Premake is annoyingly case-sensitive), and that
> target type would receive some form of data structures (likely not Lua
> objects).
> 
> I've been thinking about modifying Premake anyway. It has a few slightly
> annoying habbits, like outputting all the projects into the same folder. If
> you decide to adjust Premake to be able to output POSIX-independent
> makefiles, let me know so that we can coordinate our Premake changes.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: all...@li...
> [mailto:all...@li...]On Behalf Of
> Ryan Patterson
> Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 4:27 AM
> To: all...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release
> 
> On Monday 20 September 2004 3:22 am, Korval wrote:
> > However, I can't test it since I don't have a Cygwin environment (the
> > makefile requires it), nor do I have even the slightest clue as to how to
> > set one up.
> If you write your dependency files to multiple files rather than just one,
> you
> will not need sed to filter them. I'm betting this is your only POSIX
> dependency, am I right?
> 
> --
> Regards,
> Ryan Patterson <mailto:rpa...@cf...>
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> _______________________________________________
> Allegropro-development mailing list
> All...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> _______________________________________________
> Allegropro-development mailing list
> All...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development
>

RE: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release

[Korval <Ko...@co...>]

The makefile was generated by PreMake. I'm not adverse to having a specially
modified version of Premake (or one we could even get into the actual
Premake distribution) that builds a makefile that doesn't require POSIX.
Unfortunately, I have no idea how to write one, nor have I taken a serious
look at Premake.

If you're considering this, don't let the fact that Lua is in use scare you
off. While Premake does use Lua to build the makefile, all the Lua stuff has
already happened by the time you get the data. In theory (from what little
I've seen of the codebase), you would be making a new --target type ('mingw'
as opposed to the 'gnu' one. Premake is annoyingly case-sensitive), and that
target type would receive some form of data structures (likely not Lua
objects).

I've been thinking about modifying Premake anyway. It has a few slightly
annoying habbits, like outputting all the projects into the same folder. If
you decide to adjust Premake to be able to output POSIX-independent
makefiles, let me know so that we can coordinate our Premake changes.

-----Original Message-----
From: all...@li...
[mailto:all...@li...]On Behalf Of
Ryan Patterson
Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 4:27 AM
To: all...@li...
Subject: Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release


On Monday 20 September 2004 3:22 am, Korval wrote:
> However, I can't test it since I don't have a Cygwin environment (the
> makefile requires it), nor do I have even the slightest clue as to how to
> set one up.
If you write your dependency files to multiple files rather than just one,
you
will not need sed to filter them. I'm betting this is your only POSIX
dependency, am I right?

--
Regards,
Ryan Patterson <mailto:rpa...@cf...>


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
_______________________________________________
Allegropro-development mailing list
All...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development

Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release

[Ryan P. <rpa...@cf...>]

On Monday 20 September 2004 3:22 am, Korval wrote:
> However, I can't test it since I don't have a Cygwin environment (the
> makefile requires it), nor do I have even the slightest clue as to how to
> set one up.
If you write your dependency files to multiple files rather than just one, you 
will not need sed to filter them. I'm betting this is your only POSIX 
dependency, am I right?

-- 
Regards,
Ryan Patterson <mailto:rpa...@cf...>

Re: [Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release

[Peter C O J. <x-...@mo...>]

> MingW makefile that, theoretically, should build the MingW version.  
> However,
> I can't test it since I don't have a Cygwin environment (the makefile
> requires it), nor do I have even the slightest clue as to how to set one  
> up.

I'm not sure if I'm reading this right - are you implying that in order to
build an AllegroPro release library for use with MinGW one needs Cygwin?
If that's the case, that's surely unacceptable - from where does such
a dependency come?

-- 
Peter C O Johansson

[Allegropro-dev] Updates to CVS/new file release

[Korval <Ko...@co...>]

OK, I've got the PreMake system working (I think). I've built VC6 and .NET
projects, though I've only tested that the VC6 one compiles. Also, I have a
MingW makefile that, theoretically, should build the MingW version. However,
I can't test it since I don't have a Cygwin environment (the makefile
requires it), nor do I have even the slightest clue as to how to set one up.

Additionally, the MingW project is missing some other things that were not
done during the port that Ron tried. Specifically, the compiler-specific
versions do not include each other's files; as such, the MingW port needs
it's own compiler-specific files as specified on this page:
http://allegropro.sourceforge.net/Conventions/allegropro_developers_conventi
on.htm (note: this page has not been updated with the recent split of
memplat.c into memcomp.c).

Once those files are created, the makefile ought to work. If it doesn't,
then there are likely a few other porting issues that need to be worked out,
or that Premake sucks and we need to use something else. If you add new
files, you will probably need to update the makefile and the project files.
To do so, download Premake (on SourceForge) and run it with the appropriate
command like switches on it (in the directory where Premake.lua is):

Premake --target *1 --plat *2  --compiler *3

*1 is a standard Premake option. It refers to the type of project file that
Premake should generate. 'vc6' will generate a Visual Studio 6.0 project,
while 'gnu' will generate a makefile that can run in the standard POSIX
environment (which is why you need Cygwin for MingW).

*2 is the operating system. This switch only works with my Premake.lua. It
can be "win32", "linux", or "macosx", though the latter two aren't really
supported.

*3 is the compiler. This may be "msvc" or "gcc".

Note: the Premake.lua file isn't quite complete. It doesn't define the
platform-specific defines yet. As such, you probably shouldn't rely on them
until I update the projects.

RE: [Allegropro-dev] MinGW Port

[Korval <Ko...@co...>]

I was kinda wondering about that too. I got a few files, but I didn't get a
makefile or anything.

Right now, I'm working on getting the Premake system up and running. Once
that's done, we can build makefiles easily.

-----Original Message-----
From: all...@li...
[mailto:all...@li...]On Behalf Of
Ryan Patterson
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 9:04 PM
To: all...@li...
Subject: [Allegropro-dev] MinGW Port


So, if the port has been completed, are there makefiles made?
--
Regards,
Ryan Patterson <mailto:rpa...@cf...>


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
_______________________________________________
Allegropro-development mailing list
All...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/allegropro-development

[Allegropro-dev] MinGW Port

[Ryan P. <rpa...@cf...>]

So, if the port has been completed, are there makefiles made?
-- 
Regards,
Ryan Patterson <mailto:rpa...@cf...>

Re: [Allegropro-dev] AllegroPro MinGW32 Porting

[Ryan P. <rpa...@cf...>]

On Saturday 11 September 2004 5:04 am, Ron Ophir wrote:
> Here is what I've done so far (all that is needed for the port,
> actually).
Port to what? I want to start work on a port to Linux, but I have to see 
AllegroPro working first, and to do that I'll have to install my copy of 
Visual Studio, which I'm too lazy to do :)

-- 
Regards,
Ryan Patterson <mailto:rpa...@cf...>

[Allegropro-dev] AllegroPro MinGW32 Porting

[Ron O. <ron...@gm...>]

Hi,

Here is what I've done so far (all that is needed for the port,
actually). Do I get developer status from this? I'd love to have one
:)

Best Regards,
Ron Ophir.