Author Topic: How's SFML 2.0 coming along? (Read 4569 times)

Blue Protoman · « **on:** March 06, 2012, 04:23:46 pm »

Is it stable enough to replace SFML 1.6? I'm using SFML 1.6 for my project now, but if 2.0 is as good as I hear I'll make the switch pronto. Also, I hear SFML 2.0 is faster.

Mjonir · « **Reply #1 on:** March 06, 2012, 08:26:28 pm »

I've been using SMLF2 for more than 1 year now. SFML2 is very stable (never had any problem), and more powerful. I did not use SFML1.6 that much so I can't really compare performance and so, but I don't think switching to SFML2 has any major drawback (beside the need to adapt a little bit of code, and to compile it yourself

).

dotty · « **Reply #2 on:** March 06, 2012, 10:44:35 pm »

SFML is near complete I think.

thePyro_13 · « **Reply #3 on:** March 06, 2012, 11:54:25 pm »

It's pretty much good to go, stability and performance wise. I think the only thing Laurent wants to do before release is changing the naming convention(correct me if I'm wrong).

You might want to wait for that anyway, otherwise you'll have to fix a lot of code that is referencing the wrong function/method names when he does finish it.

Blue Protoman · « **Reply #4 on:** March 07, 2012, 03:28:17 am »

Hm, so I shouldn't switch my current project to it?

model76 · « **Reply #5 on:** March 07, 2012, 10:28:56 am »

You can, but just remember that the naming convention will change soon, so that GetThingamajig will become getThingamajig soon. Laurent is working on this right now.

It is entirely up to you.

Mario · « **Reply #6 on:** March 07, 2012, 02:18:51 pm »

I think changing now might be even better than waiting. Because now it should be easier to find those stuff that changed completely (or that was renamed). With the changed naming convention all that should be left is fixing casing (which might be done using a simple regular expression replace I guess).

Blue Protoman · « **Reply #7 on:** March 07, 2012, 06:34:11 pm »

Hm...what about features?