Subject: Re: [boost] boost::directx?
From: Christian Schladetsch (christian.schladetsch_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-09 12:06:05
> We are going to be yelled-at by the powers-that-be for speaking about
>> non-C++ issues, and correctly.
> Not necessarily.
As it turns out, I should have worried more about the Spirit-Protectionists.
Even so, back on thread there was this:
> This gives us insight into the intricacies of lower-level API's and the
> problem of either abstracting or picking out commonalities, for a (more
> proper) Boost proposal. A lot of people here are interested in graphics, and
> graphics programming, both 3D and 2D. This is shown by the acceptance of
> Boost.GIL. And, we have discussed a UI library for ages. *If* somebody would
> provide an API for both DirectX and OpenGL with at least proper fDator UI,
> well, you could have yourself a winner :-)
That will never happen. I have stated, and I will say forever, that I am not
interested in wrapping anything. DirectX is called DirectX because it is
about direct access to "x" peripheral. It is not about abstractions and I am
not about introducing them.
> I heard you regarding the hardship of abstracting both these API's. But,
> that is not exactly what you would have to do if you use a lot of meta
> tricks, which you apparently are not afraid of. I...
No. No. No.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk