Can anyone recommend any C++ bindings for libsdl? I’ve found SDL++
(http://chriseineke.com/sdl++/index.html) and SDLpp
(http://sdlpp.sourceforge.net/); however, neither seems to be widely
used (as far as I can tell). Also, sdlpp is LGPL, which means it will be
incompatible with the upcoming sdl1.3 closed source license. What are
other C++ developers doing?
Cheers.
Steve.
<mailto:sdl at lists.libsdl.org>
You could easily write a C++ wrapper for SDL 1.3, and make it beerware, to
avoid any licensing problems.
Just a cursor class and a window class, etc. Every function that takes
structures that were created by other functions can be classes.
Not that much work J
And no, I am not volunteering.
Yet.From: sdl-bounces@lists.libsdl.org [mailto:sdl-bounces at lists.libsdl.org] On
Behalf Of Steven Webb
Sent: maandag 31 januari 2011 11:36
To: sdl at lists.libsdl.org
Subject: [SDL] C++ Bindings
Can anyone recommend any C++ bindings for libsdl? I’ve found SDL++
(http://chriseineke.com/sdl++/index.html) and SDLpp
(http://sdlpp.sourceforge.net/); however, neither seems to be widely used
(as far as I can tell). Also, sdlpp is LGPL, which means it will be
incompatible with the upcoming sdl1.3 closed source license. What are other
C++ developers doing?
Cheers.
Steve.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3413 - Release Date: 01/30/11
It looks like SDL++ is a straight-up wrapper for those more comfortable in a
OO-style environment. SDLpp looks like a set of wrappers with extended
functionality (essentially a basic game engine).
I work exclusively in C++, but just use the SDL C interface. The best
reasons for wrapping some SDL with C++ are to change the abstraction, get
rid of some clunky syntax, or to automate common tasks. There really aren’t
that many places which benefit from such. When I come across ones that I
feel could be better, I write a class for it (and sometimes more plain C is
enough). You can see my stuff on the SDL projects page of
http://code.bluedinosaurs.com. The thing is, it often happens that the more
useful you make something for yourself, the less useful it is to everyone
else.
See ya,
Jonny DOn Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:45 AM, Jos Kuijpers wrote:
You could easily write a C++ wrapper for SDL 1.3, and make it beerware, to
avoid any licensing problems.Just a cursor class and a window class, etc. Every function that takes
structures that were created by other functions can be classes.Not that much work J
And no, I am not volunteering.
Yet.
From: sdl-bounces at lists.libsdl.org [mailto:sdl-bounces at lists.libsdl.org]
*On Behalf Of *Steven Webb
Sent: maandag 31 januari 2011 11:36
To: sdl at lists.libsdl.org
Subject: [SDL] C++ BindingsCan anyone recommend any C++ bindings for libsdl? I’ve found SDL++ (
http://chriseineke.com/sdl++/index.html) and SDLpp (
http://sdlpp.sourceforge.net/); however, neither seems to be widely used
(as far as I can tell). Also, sdlpp is LGPL, which means it will be
incompatible with the upcoming sdl1.3 closed source license. What are other
C++ developers doing?Cheers.
Steve.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3413 - Release Date: 01/30/11
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
I am also the opinion that it is better to make use of C++ capabilities to
structure
your application/game, with direct references to the C API directly used
internally
by the classes.
There is no need to have an abstraction over an abstraction.–
Paulo
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Jonathan Dearborn wrote:
It looks like SDL++ is a straight-up wrapper for those more comfortable in
a OO-style environment. SDLpp looks like a set of wrappers with extended
functionality (essentially a basic game engine).I work exclusively in C++, but just use the SDL C interface. The best
reasons for wrapping some SDL with C++ are to change the abstraction, get
rid of some clunky syntax, or to automate common tasks. There really aren’t
that many places which benefit from such. When I come across ones that I
feel could be better, I write a class for it (and sometimes more plain C is
enough). You can see my stuff on the SDL projects page of
http://code.bluedinosaurs.com. The thing is, it often happens that the
more useful you make something for yourself, the less useful it is to
everyone else.See ya,
Jonny DOn Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:45 AM, Jos Kuijpers wrote:
You could easily write a C++ wrapper for SDL 1.3, and make it beerware, to
avoid any licensing problems.Just a cursor class and a window class, etc. Every function that takes
structures that were created by other functions can be classes.Not that much work J
And no, I am not volunteering.
Yet.
From: sdl-bounces at lists.libsdl.org [mailto:sdl-bounces at lists.libsdl.org]
*On Behalf Of *Steven Webb
Sent: maandag 31 januari 2011 11:36
To: sdl at lists.libsdl.org
Subject: [SDL] C++ BindingsCan anyone recommend any C++ bindings for libsdl? I’ve found SDL++ (
http://chriseineke.com/sdl++/index.html) and SDLpp (
http://sdlpp.sourceforge.net/); however, neither seems to be widely used
(as far as I can tell). Also, sdlpp is LGPL, which means it will be
incompatible with the upcoming sdl1.3 closed source license. What are other
C++ developers doing?Cheers.
Steve.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3413 - Release Date: 01/30/11
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
I am also the opinion that it is better to make use of C++ capabilities to
structure
your application/game, with direct references to the C API directly used
internally
by the classes.
There is no need to have an abstraction over an abstraction.–
Paulo
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Jonathan Dearborn wrote:
It looks like SDL++ is a straight-up wrapper for those more comfortable in
a OO-style environment. SDLpp looks like a set of wrappers with extended
functionality (essentially a basic game engine).I work exclusively in C++, but just use the SDL C interface. The best
reasons for wrapping some SDL with C++ are to change the abstraction, get
rid of some clunky syntax, or to automate common tasks. There really aren’t
that many places which benefit from such. When I come across ones that I
feel could be better, I write a class for it (and sometimes more plain C is
enough). You can see my stuff on the SDL projects page of
http://code.bluedinosaurs.com. The thing is, it often happens that the
more useful you make something for yourself, the less useful it is to
everyone else.See ya,
Jonny DOn Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:45 AM, Jos Kuijpers wrote:
You could easily write a C++ wrapper for SDL 1.3, and make it beerware, to
avoid any licensing problems.Just a cursor class and a window class, etc. Every function that takes
structures that were created by other functions can be classes.Not that much work J
And no, I am not volunteering.
Yet.
From: sdl-bounces at lists.libsdl.org [mailto:sdl-bounces at lists.libsdl.org]
*On Behalf Of *Steven Webb
Sent: maandag 31 januari 2011 11:36
To: sdl at lists.libsdl.org
Subject: [SDL] C++ BindingsCan anyone recommend any C++ bindings for libsdl? I’ve found SDL++ (
http://chriseineke.com/sdl++/index.html) and SDLpp (
http://sdlpp.sourceforge.net/); however, neither seems to be widely used
(as far as I can tell). Also, sdlpp is LGPL, which means it will be
incompatible with the upcoming sdl1.3 closed source license. What are other
C++ developers doing?Cheers.
Steve.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3413 - Release Date: 01/30/11
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
Message-ID: <4D4690A3.2080204 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=“iso-8859-1”; Format=“flowed”Can anyone recommend any C++ bindings for libsdl? I’ve found SDL++
(http://chriseineke.com/sdl++/index.html) and SDLpp
(http://sdlpp.sourceforge.net/); however, neither seems to be widely
used (as far as I can tell). Also, sdlpp is LGPL, which means it will be
incompatible with the upcoming sdl1.3 closed source license. What are
other C++ developers doing?Cheers.
Steve.
I’m currently writing a wrapper, but I’m currently just working on
smart-pointer type behavior, and I haven’t even tried to compile a
single piece of it, and everything’s in SVN, so it isn’t currently
accessible (on SF, so it’s been caught up in their counter-hacking
measures). It does include a threading suite based on the one that’s
getting added to C++ with C++0x (this one is more limited, but it’s
based on it). The current license is GPL with a fairly big exception
(it’s an attempt to produce an LGPL-type license despite using C++
templates), but I’m up for applying some other license (I’ve been
considering MIT license anyways).
link: http://sourceforge.net/projects/sdlcp/
If you’re interested, I’ll email you the files.> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 18:36:19 +0800
From: Steven Webb <steven.daniel.webb at gmail.com>
To: sdl at lists.libsdl.org
Subject: [SDL] C++ Bindings
I don’t like to use wrappers. I like high-level modules that add
significant high-level functionality.
My input system uses SDL, but it’s no simple wrapper. It also maps
physical inputs to logical inputs, with a mapping that can be changed at
runtime.
My graphics system uses SDL/OpenGL, but it’s no simple wrapper. It also
provides matrix color transforms, rotate (in 90 degree increments) and
flip operations, and scaling.
Neither of these systems is publicly available. Both are designed for
my specific needs. Both use SDL directly instead of going through an
intermediate wrapper library.On 1/31/2011 03:36, Steven Webb wrote:
[…] What are
other C++ developers doing?
–
Rainer Deyke - rainerd at eldwood.com
I use the library directly as needed.
Although certain classes may effectively be a wrapper around an SDL structure (for example, a Sprite or Image class); in general SDL has no point in being object oriented.
I am also under the thinking that there is no point in wrapping an extraction (unless it is for a language binding not supporting the current interface; for example Python).
I prefer SDL over other multimedia libraries because it’s more bare than those. I prefer to implement functionality myself than rely on a general-use implementation. Specific use allows for optimization and interface perfection.
As for making it more familiar to a C++ programmer… why bother? SDL is already Simple; any C++ programmer should be able to pick it up just as easily as SFML or ClanLib (two C++ SDL-like libraries I know of).------------------------
EM3 Nathaniel Fries, U.S. Navy
Hello Steven,
The development for SDL++ has slowed down a lot. I’ve been lurking on the SDL
mailing list to see where 1.3/2.0 is going to plan for an eventual fork down the
road.
SDL++ is obviously not production ready. The groundwork is there, but as other
have pointed out, it’s more like a wrapper than C++ bindings. And that may not
necessarily be a bad thing (see the events extension).
If you any questions, please feel free to ask! (-:
Can anyone recommend any C++ bindings for libsdl? I’ve found SDL++
(http://chriseineke.com/sdl++/index.html) and SDLpp
(http://sdlpp.sourceforge.net/); however, neither seems to be widely used (as
far as I can tell). Also, sdlpp is LGPL, which means it will be incompatible
with the upcoming sdl1.3 closed source license. What are other C++ developers doing?