Suggestions for architecture improvements

[MrDoomMaster]

For the platform implementation classes, is there any reason why you're not using CRTP? The virtual functions seem unnecessary.

The name sf::RenderWindow::Display() seems a bit weird to me, how about something like FlipBuffers() or SwapBuffers()?

The latter suggestion isn't as important as the first. I'd appreciate any feedback. Thank you!

::EDIT::

I have more suggestions after having looked through the source a bit more:

- Provide the user the ability to specify depth and stencil bit depths, preferably through the VideoMode object. Currently these values are hard-coded.

[Laurent]

For the platform implementation classes, is there any reason why you're not using CRTP? The virtual functions seem unnecessary.

Are you talking about sf::WindowImpl ? It's the only class using virtual functions to implement system-specific code.

The name sf::RenderWindow::Display() seems a bit weird to me, how about something like FlipBuffers() or SwapBuffers()?

To me, FlipBuffers() is the weird one. Why would a beginner have to know that there are internally two buffers, and that to display its drawing on screen he has to flip them, and so call a FlipBuffers() function ?
When you want to display, call Display(). Simple. I think FlipBuffers() is only meaningful for us, low-level graphics programmers.

- Provide the user the ability to specify depth and stencil bit depths, preferably through the VideoMode object. Currently these values are hard-coded.

Yep, that will be part of a more generic configuration option when creating windows.

[MrDoomMaster]

Yes, I am talking about sf::WindowImpl. Was there a reason to use virtual functions instead of CRTP?

I do agree with your statement on the Display() function. I tend to think of backbuffers as 'swappable', however this may not always be the case. Now that I understand your intended meaning behind the function name, I have no problem with it

Thank you for your feedback. You have a great library! I was looking for an alternative to SDL for a long time.

Keep up the great work.

[Laurent]

Yes, I am talking about sf::WindowImpl. Was there a reason to use virtual functions instead of CRTP?

I decided to use a base class in this case, mainly to gather all the common code. So.. yes, maybe CRTP could do the job as well

Thanks for the hint.