Messages

16

Feature requests / Separate Window.Display from event polling

« on: February 04, 2008, 03:35:18 pm »

The way it is done right now, is that GetEvent only polls system events when the queue is empty, so on average you will be polling system events twice every event loop (at the beginning and at the end). It is highly unlikely that this will become a bottleneck for your app.

Ok. I haven't read the code and supposed poll was done every call. :oops:
Sorry.

I'll never have my passive waiting ! :cry:

EDIT : Yep, it's a different one Look at this one : Attente passive.

17

Feature requests / Separate Window.Display from event polling

« on: February 04, 2008, 02:37:04 pm »

It's not actually a memory leak since it's the intended behavior.

Splitting event handling from window display is a great suggestion, I've thought of it a few times, but your model isn't really adequate.

Polling the system through system calls (even if highly optimized) every time GetEvent is called is all but efficient.
I understand backward compatibility issues, but I submitted another suggestion a few weeks ago which aimed at the same system of SFML, so :
There could be two functions, PollEvents() et WaitEvents(), which would poll the event loop of the system. The two would add events to SFML events queue, as it currently is. WaitEvents would act as PollEvents do, unless the first poll is empty, if so, WaitEvents would enter in passive wait from the system.

18

Graphics / GL_INVALID_VALUE generated from glClearColor()?

« on: January 28, 2008, 08:19:05 pm »

It's too embarrassingly obvious so I'm not going to say what it was lol.

Héhéhé

19

Graphics / GL_INVALID_VALUE generated from glClearColor()?

« on: January 28, 2008, 07:47:50 pm »

Never hapened to me. Do you have a minimal code that show the behavior ?

20

General discussions / Adding SFML vs2008 projects to my solution...

« on: January 28, 2008, 07:44:54 pm »

I only use Window and Graphics (and System, of course) packages, and I don't want to include Network nor Audio package to my project.

I don't mind adding a new project that would contain everything, but the current machinery should stay as is.

21

Python / Building python binding from SVN

« on: January 27, 2008, 06:20:32 am »

Really didn't mean to offend anyone.  :shock:

I think it's ok.
Laurent seems a bit... Occupied these days.

22

General discussions / [SOLVED] SFML 1.2 RC

« on: January 06, 2008, 10:12:19 am »

And thanks for telling me about Visual Leak Detector, which I didn't know

Same here, thanks !

23

Feature requests / Upside Down World

« on: October 06, 2007, 04:26:13 am »

If it can be done w/o lot of changes (not propable), it should be there as a compile time macro constant ! Or through templates... :lol:

This is exactly the kind of features a programmer can easily do, but that would impact every programmers (a comparison for every draw) if directly in the lib.
For a so small advantage, if it's not a compile time option, it's not worth...

24

General discussions / Gentoo ebuild

« on: October 06, 2007, 04:13:55 am »

You can build packages with the compiled and installed data in it

Laurent, gentoo (as you know...) is a source based Linux distro, so distributing compiled packages is at its opposite philosophy; it would be weird.

As i'll make gentoo as my primiry OS soon, i'm glad to know that there's a gentoo ebuild. Thx !

25

General discussions / why not using a namespace

« on: August 17, 2007, 02:26:13 pm »

The main advantage of namespace would be the Koenig Lookup !
It would allow developers to do not break C++ idioms, for example massive utilisation of swap ! Users would do not have to use something like sfSwap, which is really NOT cute, and without having to pollute global namespace with another swap overload !

As lubos said, lot's of tools use namespace for easier navigation. See the SFML doxygen generated documentation : every class begin with S, it's not a really good organisation, it's not absolutely bad, but not perfect through.