Messages

1

Feature requests / Makefiles for MinGW / MSys

« on: December 13, 2008, 03:31:54 pm »

I would very appreciate it, if SFML would deliver makefiles for mingw32-make or msys with a "target=mingw" switch, or something similar.

It's is a little bit annoying to modify the makefiles every time I checkout the trunk.

Just my 2 cents.

2

General discussions / [SOLVED] SFML 1.2 RC

« on: December 29, 2007, 09:42:50 pm »

Couldn't you do a pre-release of it?

Install: http://tortoisesvn.net/downloads
And checkout the trunk: https://sfml.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/sfml

3

General discussions / [SOLVED] SFML 1.2 RC

« on: December 14, 2007, 10:31:42 pm »

...

Yes, but they still need by declared by a "extern (C)".

See: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/interfaceToC.html

So should no big thing.

4

General discussions / [SOLVED] SFML 1.2 RC

« on: December 14, 2007, 11:40:50 am »

Hurray!

I'm happy to hear that the C-Interface is implemented.
I hope somebody will make bindings for "D" (http://www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html), otherwise I'll need to try it

5

Feature requests / File manager

« on: November 07, 2007, 08:28:22 pm »

Maybe pick this up for the Roadmap as well?
With using zip or 7-zip (www.7-zip.org) files/formats as archive

6

General discussions / Less formats vs less dependencies ?

« on: November 02, 2007, 01:01:46 pm »

Mh, i dislike games which only produce jpeg screenshots. Because often the red becomes very blurry.

7

General discussions / Less formats vs less dependencies ?

« on: November 01, 2007, 09:13:16 pm »

TGA and/or PNG.
Both support alpha channels, are free, lossless and easy.
The last one supports better compression (zlib).

Nothing more, because at least one of them should fit any needs.
BMP and JPG are uninteresting because they don't have an alpha channel. Something about JPG, who wants textures with artifacts?

About dds... well... i can't say much about it, but it seems good.

8

General discussions / Create an announces Mailinglist

« on: September 26, 2007, 10:45:18 am »

See title, i would be very happy about it.
To be informed via Mail about new Releases and such things, containing a change log etc...

9

General discussions / Benchmark : SDL vs SFML

« on: September 07, 2007, 04:32:49 pm »

I'd run the test 3 times in a row. The result is from the last test.

My Machine

AMD Athlon X2 3800+ EE
2 GB DDR2-800 Ram in dual channel
GeForce 7600 GT
Asus Motherboard with nForce 570 ultra chipset
Windows XP 64bit edition

Result

1/ Test : sprites
SDL  displayed 9 frames
SFML displayed 313 frames
--> SFML is 3477% faster than SDL

2/ Test : alpha-blended sprites
SDL  displayed 6 frames
SFML displayed 238 frames
--> SFML is 3966% faster than SDL

3/ Test : rotating sprites
SDL  displayed 3 frames
SFML displayed 278 frames
--> SFML is 9266% faster than SDL

4/ Test : static text
SDL  displayed 942 frames
SFML displayed 9795 frames
--> SFML is 1039% faster than SDL

5/ Test : dynamic text
SDL  displayed 729 frames
SFML displayed 999 frames
--> SFML is 137% faster than SDL

10

Graphics / Compile problems with font tutorial

« on: September 06, 2007, 01:54:43 pm »

In the front. I suggest heavily that you dismiss Dev-C++.
Dev-C++ is outdated and the development on it stopped a long time ago.

As an alternative you can use Code::Blocks (http://codeblocks.org/ - be sure to use a nightly build) or eclipse with the CDT plugin (http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/).

11

Feature requests / Simple modification for SFML to work with Intel C++ compiler

« on: September 05, 2007, 06:48:04 pm »

Ouch,... yes :?
My patch would add "defined(__x86_64__)" as well, but right, the _WIN64 should not be there. However, it works now with the 64bit compiler of the Platform SDK. So it would be better if you close/delete this patch, because its needless now.

12

Feature requests / Simple modification for SFML to work with Intel C++ compiler

« on: September 05, 2007, 04:35:58 pm »

Adding "|| defined(_WIN64)" on line 71 would be fine too, for 64bit windows.
Maybe look at the patch i posted yesterday:

http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1787741&group_id=188964&atid=927429

13

General discussions / Next release

« on: September 01, 2007, 03:28:09 pm »

Hi,
first, I'm very happy to found this project, it looks very interesting and seems to have a big potential if you keep up your good work!

Ok, to this topic, i saw that name spaces will be added and are used in the benchmark source as well. So, i think it would be a good idea to release a newer version which includes the name spaces (and maybe some bug fixes like the screen shot up-side-down thing) before people start building applications on the top of the current API without name spaces. Otherwise, these people must rename all used functions...

Well, i think this is/was worth a new topic, if not, delete it and I'll post it in the name space topic


Regards, CareBear