4 ms·
It would be ok, if started from the beggining with this.. maybe people would use it.. and then when ios and android happen, its would be adapted to work on them
by oscargrouch 13y ago
It would be ok, if started from the beggining with this.. maybe people would use it.. and then when ios and android happen, its would be adapted to work on them.. but now?
people that have C++ or already have they own toolkits, or use some provided by the platform.. i think its just too late for this..
its different with a network stack... its badly needed! and you use it in every way... (backend, frontend)
i think people just wont use it.. because of the points i've made earlier..
A better proposition for graphics(because its futuristic) would be to focus on what LLVM are doing for instance... like the ability to compile directly to gpu instructions..
In the direction of Opencl, cuda.. heterogeneous computing..
something that can make graphics AND vectorized computation
..than it would be just a matter of creating 2d graphics kernels, and wrap a api on top of it, C++ has a unique position here!
they need to think looking forward.. not backwards..
- MaulingMonkey 13y ago> It would be ok, if started from the beggining with this.. maybe people would use it.. and then when ios and android happen, its would be adapted to work on them.. but now? I'll grant a graphics library seems a tad silly at this point, I'd much rather see more containers, or working modules. I'm more concerned by the aversion to standard library "bloat" than a specific aversion to a 2D graphics library.