Reply-To: <arfa AT clara DOT net>
From: "Arthur" <arfa AT clara DOT net>
To: "DJGPP Mailing List" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: RE: DJ+Allegro & employment?
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 09:31:05 +0100
Message-ID: <000001bdbf82$393266a0$c34d08c3@arthur>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <199808031926100840.00024947@pogwizd.tcs.uni.wroc.pl>
Precedence: bulk

> >> Writing a win32 game (that uses 3D hardware) without any standard 3D API
> >> is like writing
> >> DJGPP DOS program without libc.
> >> Have you ever seen a game (that uses 3D hardware) which doesn't use 3D
> >> API? (like DirectX, Glide,
> >> OpenGL) I haven't. And I'm sure there will ever be no such game. Besides,
> >> it's almost impossible
> >> to write a faster 3D API than OpenGL, DirectX, Glide.
> >
> >Read the paragraph that I wrote above. It is indeed almost impossible to write a
> >hardware-based 3D system without an API; but I said "3D in software, not using any
> >APIs"
>
> Ok, but don't you think it's a waste of time? Would you spend a month working on
> something that works from -100% up to +5% faster than DirectX? (unless you're
> going to use a technique which is not supported in any API, and should work
> much faster than API's equivalent.)

Yes I would. 5% is a huge amount of processor time being wasted.

> >You can beat software APIs using your own routines, if you're good (and
> several demo
> >crews are). This is why I said that you're a good programmer if you can do that.
> >Using an API requires much less talant.
>
> I agree of course, but to do that, you have to be very, very good.

:^)

James Arthur
jaa AT arfa DOT clara DOT net
ICQ#15054819