From:	Dominique DOT Biesmans AT nospam DOT ping DOT be (please remove the nospam part) (Dominique Biesmans)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Z-buffering for Allegro (long)
Date:	Tue, 09 Sep 1997 17:53:36 GMT
Organization:	EUnet Belgium, Leuven, Belgium
Lines:	26
Message-ID:	<3415892c.870208@news.eunet.be>
References:	<34145012 DOT D39BD118 AT xs4all DOT nl> <Wixm8LAnEHF0Ewxr AT talula DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
Reply-To:	Dominique DOT Biesmans AT nospam DOT ping DOT be (please remove the nospam part)
NNTP-Posting-Host:	dialup082.leuven.eunet.be
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

On Mon, 8 Sep 1997 22:41:59 +0100, Shawn Hargreaves
<Shawn AT talula DOT demon DOT co DOT uk> wrote:

>Partly, I'm worried that Allegro is just getting too big, and that many
>people only need a small subset of what it provides. Modularity, and
>optional downloading of components, can only be a good thing...

OTOH. I think the fact that Allegro is one 'big' (big? a little over
1Mb? Look at the DirectX SDK, a -not even complete- distribution is
about 30Mb) library with a simple, but more importantly -consequent-
interface, is one of it's strongest points. 

If you want that advantage with a modular version, you'd still need
someone to do the 'administrative' work of making sure that everything
still works together. The total work load would even increase, since
you'd have several packages to be maintained, instead of one.

And in the end, you'de have several Allegro versions. One modified
version that works together with this package, and another one that
doesn't, but supports true color modes, execept for the 3D part,
therefore you'd need ... etc ... catch my drift?

What do ya think?

Dominique Biesmans

- Raw text -