Coming up with new concepts for my programming language makes me happy.
It brings me joy to know that I have created the best programming language of all time.

Too bad there probably never will be a compiler for it.

[@Average Software:]

Yes, I would release the source.
I want to use 3.1+ to follow the new standard.

@Average Software:
I guess you have a point. People using the library to a greater extent would be programmers who know how to install a library.
Still, though, I would like there to be as little work as possible to do so.
Are there not other options, such as installing SDL in a non-standard location, renaming files, running them through some kind of obfuscator, or simply telling the user that it will overridde any version of SDL installed in a standard location?

Thanks for the replies.

I do know what linking is; I compile stuff just about every day.
What I do not know, though, is the difference between static and dynamic linkage, and I will definitely look their definitions up. Thank you.

As for the .dll and .so files; I am well aware of the fact that Windows use one of them and Linux use the other.
I just felt like it was assumed that I didn't want to make the library available for anything else than Windows.

Yes. Yes. Of course SDL is a great library (I obviously wouldn't use it if I didn't think so), and the authors deserve all the credit in the world for making it, which is something I would most definitely do what I can to grant them.
What I meant by expressing myself in such a way, saying that the user wouldn't even have to know that I've been using SDL, was that it shouldn't be more work than necessary for the user to install the library; (s)he should be able to just run the installation for the library and then get going.

I know that the modern OpenGL support is also an issue of hardware and drivers, but still, having OpenGL 3.2 support doesn't necessarily mean that you have the development header installed, or that it is installed in the correct location. Having the support would obviously be a prerequisity, since there would be nothing I could do about that, but having the development header shouldn't be.

Basically you have two options.

1. Link with SDL statically. Because of the LGPL license, this means you have to make your library open source as well. Besides, if you choose this route, the user of your library could be in for a world of pain if they choose to use SDL too, for other functionality, so you should be very sure that that will never be the case or is not problematic.

I'm not sure how to do this.

2. Link with SDL dynamically, i.e., include the SDL DLL with the distribution of your library. In that case, I guess it's easiest if your library is a DLL as well, though statically linking might work...

I wouldn't make a library specifically for Windows.
I would probably develop it on Linux or Mac, and I would make sure it would be portable for all three.

Hello there.

This is a question that has kept me wondering for way too long, so now is the time to ask you, and hopefully you have an answer for me.
I've been thinking... Say I create a C++ library for graphics, using SDL for the window.
How would I handle not having to force the user to get SDL separately? You know, so smoothly that the user wouldn't even have to know I've used SDL?
Would I pre-compile it somehow? Would I create a makefile of my own, that first compiled SDL and then my library?

I haven't done this, but I think I will in the future, and if I were to ship this library to somebody else than myself, I wouldn't want it to be hard for them.

Let's also throw OpenGL into the mix. OpenGL 3.1+. How would I deal with it, since it's not standard? Write a script that checks for the existence of the GL3 folder, and if it doesn't exist, create it, and put gl3.h, which I shipped with my archive, into it?

I've been using flash, python, and more recently; Unity and C# to create little games and so far they have been really good.  I really like the fact that I can get objects interacting with each other so quickly.

However, I thought it would be a neat idea to have a go at creating an Allegro-like game library in C++, just for learning experience.  The problem is, I have no idea where to start looking for information, everything about game engine development is geared towards 3D, using DX or OpenGL.

I reckon I'm gonna re-install C++ and OpenGl, or SDL and go from there, but I'd like some info so I can at least plan the core workings of my library so That I don't make really stupid mistakes that take ages to redo.

OpenGL does 2D (internally, it's handled like 3D, but it looks like flawless 2D), and I believe DirectX does this too, but I see no reason not to use OpenGL. SDL is a great choice for the window and input.

There is no difference.

Yes.

A programmer writes code using a programming language.
A coder can be either a programmer or somebody writing code that is not a programming language (XHTML and CSS, for example).

I used Game Maker around the ages of 11 - 13, I think.
These days, I use C++.

I can't even get past "Press A to start".

I am grumpy because the happy programmer room is filled with IDE... stuff.

I think the discussion is interesting.

... Don't hit me.

Hey, that Shut up and Jam Gaiden RPG was made using Game Maker IIRC.

I'm almost certain that was made using RM2k3

no. it was in fact made in game maker. it started out as a rpgmaker project but he quickly realized it'd be impossible to make it as he'd like to in rpgmaker, and converted to game maker.

oops, w broom beat me to it.

anyway, learning gml is not something that'd take you years to do before you could do anything past pong. that's a ridiculous overstatement. even c++ wouldn't take you that long. you can learn a programming language in about 3 weeks if you work at it.

With previous experience from web development (PHP and JavaScript) and some scripting languages (GML and BlitzBasic, mainly), it only took me four days of learning until I could make a Breakout clone with SDL without any help, when I first started out with C++. The learning curve has quickly increased its altitude since then.

shiny macs 

Of course!

I am a super mega happy programmer because after 2 days with setting up all the stuff on my Ubuntu I finally got Code::Blocks to compile and run my project that I was working on in Visual Studio in Windows. I am so happy. Now nothing will stop me from working on Linux. All the thanks for the info people. Now I am a happy Linux C++ SDL OpenGL programmer.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4009/4523548513_ebcfafc610_b.jpg

This is only like an hour into the project. I is a simple start into 3D with OpenGL, a simple RTS.

Yay! Code::Blocks.

I programmed a very basic 3D game engine in Flash from scratch today! It's something I've tried doing multiple times before and failed at during the past year or so. Each time I'd get just a little closer to something that works, and this time I finally did it! Also, the law of cosines is awesome.

I wish I had any clue on how to do this.

I think this is the first time I see a new message from you in a long time.

THE MATRIX
WHOA

Code:

GLfloat matrix[] = {1,1,16,2,
                    3,3,12,8,
                    7,1,14,4,
                    1,6,16,2};

There. I made you a matrix.

3D RPG Adventure.
I want the stuff I've been sketching on for a few years already to finally come to life.

I've gotten SDL 1.3 working with OpenGL on my Mac now as well, and I've also fixed my Qt environment there, so I'm able to compile my SVN application for Mac now as well, and I've added some more controls:



You can load recent configurations now, so now for locating other ones, and for creating and editing them.

Also, on topic, I'm a happy programmer because I'm making progress with my Subversion management program:

What does it do? Is it just a fancy way to avoid typing "svn update" or "svn commit", or is there more to it?

It is partly that, but it is also a way to organise these "configurations" as you can see in the screenshot, which contains the paths to the repository and the checkout directory, the login information as well as a name for the configuration.

I also want it to be able to create new repositories on the server if I can make that happen.

I would really like that OpenGL book. Finally I found a good c++ programmer in Linux. So a question for you Skomakar'n. What IDE do you use in Linux and how hard would it be to move from Visual Studio to Linux? Thanks.

I didn't know where else to post this.

It depends on what I'm doing. Usually, I do work in an IDE, and that IDE is Code::Blocks. The main features that I love about this IDE are the file tree hierarchy, the code completion, auto-indentation and syntax colouring, as well as the fact that every time you save, Code::Blocks makes sure that there is an empty line at the bottom of the file to prevent include errors, and it also trims all of the lines, so that there are no unnecessary whitespace characters at the end of any lines, and, most importantly, makes sure empty lines are truly empty and contain nothing but the newline character, and no spaces or tabs, and obviously also the compiler and debugger integration.

The nicest feature of all is to be able to script your own code completion. Define a keyword, and when you write that keyword and press Ctrl+J, your script will generate code for you. This way, I write the base of my header files simply by writing "h", for example.

When I'm working with Nokia Qt, though, getting this library to work properly in Code::Blocks has proven to be a pain that's simply not worth it. I might still write the code in Code::Blocks, but I will compile in the terminal; I've made the alias qmc that calls all of the necessary commands to compile Qt projects, so it's really quick too.

My latest Qt project, though, I'm actually writing in Gedit. I don't know why, really, but gedit has syntax colouring, auto-indentation and a side pane able to show your file hierarchy. I don't have access to my code completion commands, though, but I formatted my computer yesterday, so I don't have access to them in Code::Blocks either, at the moment, anyway.

Also, on topic, I'm a happy programmer because I'm making progress with my Subversion management program:

I can't say anything else than that this makes me hate Windows, and you are a masochistic hero for doing this.

blah blah

OpenGL developer and on Linux side of life? If yes, win. 

Indeed! Linux and Mac, that is. I'm running Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala and Mac OS X Snow Leopard on a Lenovo T61p and a MacBook Pro. The Linux one has a working MinGW installed, so that I don't have to use any Windows computer to compile. The executables have turned out just fine both in Wine and on three different native Windows computers so far, so it works fine.

I'm a happy programmer today, because the day before yesterday, these books on OpenGL 3.0, OpenGL 3.1 and GLSL arrived:



Here's some tiny, tiny progress (and this stuff I've actually been able to do before, but in 3.2, which I've forgotten now; I'm planning on getting back there, when the books allow me to):



Also, I've managed to set up my own SVN server, and since I find the terminal commands easier to use than the GUI's I've tried, I'm now writing my own wrapper application to suit my SVN needs, and I'm also compiling Boost again at this very moment.