How to contribute a patch?

Hello Denizens of the SDL Mailing List!

My name is Sam Payson, and I’ve got a patch that allows the creation of OpenGL 3.2 contexts under OS X. How should I go about getting this reviewed/sent upstream? Please inform me if I’m posting this in the wrong place.

Sincerely,
Sam

Just attach the patch(es) to your email and perhaps a test case if one
doesn’t exist.

PatrickOn Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Samuel Payson wrote:

Hello Denizens of the SDL Mailing List!

My name is Sam Payson, and I’ve got a patch that allows the creation of
OpenGL 3.2 contexts under OS X. How should I go about getting this
reviewed/sent upstream? Please inform me if I’m posting this in the wrong
place.

Sincerely,
Sam


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

The best way is to create a bug in bugzilla (http://bugzilla.libsdl.org)
and then send a message to the mailing list so people can check it out.

Keeping it in bugzilla means that when Ryan or I do a pass on bugs we’ll
see it, and a note to the mailing list gets other eyes on it for feedback.

Cheers!On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Samuel Payson wrote:

Hello Denizens of the SDL Mailing List!

My name is Sam Payson, and I’ve got a patch that allows the creation of
OpenGL 3.2 contexts under OS X. How should I go about getting this
reviewed/sent upstream? Please inform me if I’m posting this in the wrong
place.

Sincerely,
Sam


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

Hi Sam,
It seems that for Windows 8 Metro development struct pack alignment >must<
be set to 8 bytes now. SDL uses 4 bytes alignment set in
begin_code.h and there might be alignment issues in passing events caused
by this new requirement on this platform - maybe it would be worth to
switch in SDL to 8 bytes alignment too?

regards,
Piotr

First off, I’m pretty sure it has been 8 on Windows for a while. If SDL is
properly coded, then this is not an issue. This is the way it should look:

<Windows.h> {

pack(push, whatever)

...structs here...

pack(pop)

}

<SDL.h> {

pack(push, 4)

...structs here...

pack(pop)

}

The only way the structure sizes would mismatch is if the push/pop was not
done properly. Also,
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa296569(v=vs.60).aspx “The default
pack size for Windows 3.x is 2, whereas the default for Win32 is 8.” and
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/2e70t5y1(v=vs.80).aspx “The default
value for n is 8.” – looks like it has been 8 for a long while.

In short, the Windows headers must set packing to 8. They do so
programmatically regardless of what you set the default packing to. SDL
doesn’t need to do anything else unless it feels like it.

PatrickOn Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:09 PM, wrote:

Hi Sam,
It seems that for Windows 8 Metro development struct pack alignment >must<
be set to 8 bytes now. SDL uses 4 bytes alignment set in
begin_code.h and there might be alignment issues in passing events caused
by this new requirement on this platform - maybe it would be worth to
switch in SDL to 8 bytes alignment too?

regards,
Piotr


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

This metro dev thing is a cross simply a nev lib for making apps/games that
microsoft has invented in order to have total control over something since
C++ has gotten away from them. I expect it to fail after a couple of
billion dollars have been spent to make it a new standard. The cross
standards for apps/games have not changed with the latest version of
windows and windows does not run these applications or games made with this
new library and better and maybe even, not as well. If I understand
correctly what has been asked, I don’t see a reason to include this new lib
as if it were a platform or to make any change to try to keep the libs
fully compatable.On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:09 PM, wrote:

Hi Sam,
It seems that for Windows 8 Metro development struct pack alignment >must<
be set to 8 bytes now. SDL uses 4 bytes alignment set in
begin_code.h and there might be alignment issues in passing events caused
by this new requirement on this platform - maybe it would be worth to
switch in SDL to 8 bytes alignment too?

regards,
Piotr


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

additioal info>>>>

By Katherine Noyes http://www.pcworld.com/author/Katherine-Noyes,
PCWorldhttp://www.pcworld.com/

Last month Microsoft caused considerable concern in the open
sourcehttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256189/want_freedom_from_vendor_lockin_survey_says_choose_open_source.htmlcommunity
when it made clear that the free, Express version of its upcoming
new Visual Studio development software would no longer offer
supporthttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256339/microsoft_delivers_a_blow_to_open_source_with_visual_studio_11.htmlfor
desktop-style applications.

and, the company suggested at the time that users of Visual Studio 11
Express would only be able to develop
Metrohttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/240163/are_mobilestyle_interfaces_leaving_desktop_power_users_behind.htmlapplications.

Last Friday, however, Microsoft did what appears to be an about-face and
announced that a new, free-of-charge ?Windows Desktop? version of the
software–which has since been renamed Visual Studio Express 2012–will
support desktop-style applications after all.

and so once again microsoft tries to destroy open source and bid to
control all programs on all platforms >BEWARE<On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:09 PM, wrote:

Hi Sam,
It seems that for Windows 8 Metro development struct pack alignment >must<
be set to 8 bytes now. SDL uses 4 bytes alignment set in
begin_code.h and there might be alignment issues in passing events caused
by this new requirement on this platform - maybe it would be worth to
switch in SDL to 8 bytes alignment too?

regards,
Piotr


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

additioal info>>>>

By Katherine Noyes http://www.pcworld.com/author/Katherine-Noyes,
PCWorld http://www.pcworld.com/

Last month Microsoft caused considerable concern in the open sourcehttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256189/want_freedom_from_vendor_lockin_survey_says_choose_open_source.htmlcommunity when it made clear that the free, Express version of its upcoming
new Visual Studio development software would no longer offer supporthttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256339/microsoft_delivers_a_blow_to_open_source_with_visual_studio_11.htmlfor desktop-style applications.

and, the company suggested at the time that users of Visual Studio 11
Express would only be able to develop Metrohttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/240163/are_mobilestyle_interfaces_leaving_desktop_power_users_behind.htmlapplications.

Last Friday, however, Microsoft did what appears to be an about-face and
announced that a new, free-of-charge ?Windows Desktop? version of the
software–which has since been renamed Visual Studio Express 2012–will
support desktop-style applications after all.

and so once again microsoft tries to destroy open source and bid to
control all programs on all platforms >BEWARE<

Whoa, turn down the crazy. Nobody expects free and open source from
Microsoft. Yes, they have an agenda but they also have thousands of
employees’ paychecks to pay. If they want to charge for a product they
made, then so be it. As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are
plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to
applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it!

PatrickOn Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 9:39 PM, R Manard wrote:

There’s nothing crazy there.? No one’s expecting Microsoft to create open source software; what he’s saying is that they clearly want to make it difficult for other people to create open source software, and establish a closed iOS-style system where they control all software on the platform.? And there’s not much reason to believe that that’s not true.________________________________
From: Patrick Baggett <baggett.patrick at gmail.com>
To: SDL Development List
Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 6:29 AM
Subject: Re: [SDL] Default struct packing alignment

On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 9:39 PM, R Manard wrote:

additioal info>>>>
By Katherine Noyes, PCWorld
Last month Microsoft caused considerable concern in the open source community when it made clear that the free, Express version of its upcoming new Visual Studio development software would no longer offer support for desktop-style applications.
and, the company suggested at the time that users of Visual Studio 11 Express would only be able to develop Metro applications.
Last Friday, however, Microsoft did what appears to be an about-face and announced that a new, free-of-charge ?Windows Desktop? version of the software–which has since been renamed Visual Studio Express 2012–will support desktop-style applications after all.

and so once again microsoft tries to destroy open source and bid to control all programs on all platforms >BEWARE<

Whoa, turn down the crazy. Nobody expects free and open source from Microsoft. Yes, they have an agenda but they also have thousands of employees’ paychecks to pay. If they want to charge for a product they made, then so be it. As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it!

Patrick


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

I don’t know why I’m bothering to reply, since in T minus two emails this
will be a flamewar, oh well. I agree that every vendor wants no competition
and vendor lock in, including Microsoft. This will never happen. Once
again, " As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are plenty of
alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to applications.
What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it! "

As far as I see, there is a strong, remarkable difference from “Microsoft
wants XYZ” and “Microsoft is going to destroy open source and control all
platforms and all programs.” That would literally require the destruction
of Linux, OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, Android, iOS,
MacOS X; all hardware that can run OSes other than ones Microsoft provides;
and the destruction of all source code and binaries of all programs that do
not run on that Windows. Once again, ain’t gonna happen. So when some
uses phrases like “all platforms” and “all programs”, I find it
absolutely ludicrous. Anyways, I’m done on this one, I’m sure the OP didn’t
actually intend to imply the above.

PatrickOn Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Mason Wheeler wrote:

There’s nothing crazy there. No one’s expecting Microsoft to create open
source software; what he’s saying is that they clearly want to make it
difficult for other people to create open source software, and establish a
closed iOS-style system where they control all software on the platform.
And there’s not much reason to believe that that’s not true.


From: Patrick Baggett <@Patrick_Baggett>
To: SDL Development List
Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 6:29 AM
Subject: Re: [SDL] Default struct packing alignment

On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 9:39 PM, R Manard wrote:

additioal info>>>>
By Katherine Noyes http://www.pcworld.com/author/Katherine-Noyes,
PCWorld http://www.pcworld.com/
Last month Microsoft caused considerable concern in the open sourcehttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256189/want_freedom_from_vendor_lockin_survey_says_choose_open_source.htmlcommunity when it made clear that the free, Express version of its upcoming
new Visual Studio development software would no longer offer supporthttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256339/microsoft_delivers_a_blow_to_open_source_with_visual_studio_11.htmlfor desktop-style applications.
and, the company suggested at the time that users of Visual Studio 11
Express would only be able to develop Metrohttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/240163/are_mobilestyle_interfaces_leaving_desktop_power_users_behind.htmlapplications.
Last Friday, however, Microsoft did what appears to be an about-face and
announced that a new, free-of-charge ?Windows Desktop? version of the
software–which has since been renamed Visual Studio Express 2012–will
support desktop-style applications after all.

and so once again microsoft tries to destroy open source and bid to
control all programs on all platforms >BEWARE<

Whoa, turn down the crazy. Nobody expects free and open source from
Microsoft. Yes, they have an agenda but they also have thousands of
employees’ paychecks to pay. If they want to charge for a product they
made, then so be it. As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are
plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to
applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it!

Patrick


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 was originally going to reply, but then I thought we’d be dragging this
topic way off, but since we’re already there, here are my three cents.
First, Windows/Microsoft has always had a semi-closed source agenda.
Second, Apple has already done it, and no one really cared, and we can
still develop SDL-based apps for it no problem. Third, there’s no sense
starting an immature panic on a OS that hasn’t even been officially
released yet (outside of beta, anyway).
As much as we don’t want to admit it, Windows is the most popular
general-use operating system, and as a result, it typically has long term
support on it’s various OS versions (look at Windows XP, it’s still alive
and kicking).
And, an app-store model for an OS is actually a good idea - it keeps a
higher standard for mainstream applications, and people are still able to
install applications that don’t appear on the OS app-store.

Also, don’t troll and hijack threads.

-AlexOn Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Patrick Baggett <baggett.patrick at gmail.com>wrote:

I don’t know why I’m bothering to reply, since in T minus two emails this
will be a flamewar, oh well. I agree that every vendor wants no competition
and vendor lock in, including Microsoft. This will never happen. Once
again, " As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are plenty of
alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to applications.
What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it! "

As far as I see, there is a strong, remarkable difference from “Microsoft
wants XYZ” and “Microsoft is going to destroy open source and control all
platforms and all programs.” That would literally require the destruction
of Linux, OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, Android, iOS,
MacOS X; all hardware that can run OSes other than ones Microsoft provides;
and the destruction of all source code and binaries of all programs that do
not run on that Windows. Once again, ain’t gonna happen. So when some
uses phrases like “all platforms” and “all programs”, I find it
absolutely ludicrous. Anyways, I’m done on this one, I’m sure the OP didn’t
actually intend to imply the above.

Patrick

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Mason Wheeler wrote:

There’s nothing crazy there. No one’s expecting Microsoft to create open
source software; what he’s saying is that they clearly want to make it
difficult for other people to create open source software, and establish a
closed iOS-style system where they control all software on the platform.
And there’s not much reason to believe that that’s not true.


From: Patrick Baggett <baggett.patrick at gmail.com>
To: SDL Development List
Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 6:29 AM
Subject: Re: [SDL] Default struct packing alignment

On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 9:39 PM, R Manard wrote:

additioal info>>>>
By Katherine Noyes http://www.pcworld.com/author/Katherine-Noyes,
PCWorld http://www.pcworld.com/
Last month Microsoft caused considerable concern in the open sourcehttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256189/want_freedom_from_vendor_lockin_survey_says_choose_open_source.htmlcommunity when it made clear that the free, Express version of its upcoming
new Visual Studio development software would no longer offer supporthttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256339/microsoft_delivers_a_blow_to_open_source_with_visual_studio_11.htmlfor desktop-style applications.
and, the company suggested at the time that users of Visual Studio 11
Express would only be able to develop Metrohttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/240163/are_mobilestyle_interfaces_leaving_desktop_power_users_behind.htmlapplications.
Last Friday, however, Microsoft did what appears to be an about-face and
announced that a new, free-of-charge ?Windows Desktop? version of the
software–which has since been renamed Visual Studio Express 2012–will
support desktop-style applications after all.

and so once again microsoft tries to destroy open source and bid
to control all programs on all platforms >BEWARE<

Whoa, turn down the crazy. Nobody expects free and open source from
Microsoft. Yes, they have an agenda but they also have thousands of
employees’ paychecks to pay. If they want to charge for a product they
made, then so be it. As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are
plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to
applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it!

Patrick


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


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

Wow, I’m not defending myself or any opinion of mine. Some of the
negativity, like calling my opinion crazy, was uncalled for. That said,
what about sdl? the ms dev thing in relation to sdl, what say you?On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Alex Barry <alex.barry at gmail.com> wrote:

I was originally going to reply, but then I thought we’d be dragging this
topic way off, but since we’re already there, here are my three cents.
First, Windows/Microsoft has always had a semi-closed source agenda.
Second, Apple has already done it, and no one really cared, and we can
still develop SDL-based apps for it no problem. Third, there’s no sense
starting an immature panic on a OS that hasn’t even been officially
released yet (outside of beta, anyway).
As much as we don’t want to admit it, Windows is the most popular
general-use operating system, and as a result, it typically has long term
support on it’s various OS versions (look at Windows XP, it’s still alive
and kicking).
And, an app-store model for an OS is actually a good idea - it keeps a
higher standard for mainstream applications, and people are still able to
install applications that don’t appear on the OS app-store.

Also, don’t troll and hijack threads.

-Alex

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Patrick Baggett <baggett.patrick at gmail.com wrote:

I don’t know why I’m bothering to reply, since in T minus two emails this
will be a flamewar, oh well. I agree that every vendor wants no competition
and vendor lock in, including Microsoft. This will never happen. Once
again, " As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are plenty of
alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to applications.
What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it! "

As far as I see, there is a strong, remarkable difference from “Microsoft
wants XYZ” and “Microsoft is going to destroy open source and control all
platforms and all programs.” That would literally require the destruction
of Linux, OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, Android, iOS,
MacOS X; all hardware that can run OSes other than ones Microsoft provides;
and the destruction of all source code and binaries of all programs that do
not run on that Windows. Once again, ain’t gonna happen. So when some
uses phrases like “all platforms” and “all programs”, I find it
absolutely ludicrous. Anyways, I’m done on this one, I’m sure the OP didn’t
actually intend to imply the above.

Patrick

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Mason Wheeler wrote:

There’s nothing crazy there. No one’s expecting Microsoft to create
open source software; what he’s saying is that they clearly want to make it
difficult for other people to create open source software, and establish a
closed iOS-style system where they control all software on the platform.
And there’s not much reason to believe that that’s not true.


From: Patrick Baggett <baggett.patrick at gmail.com>
To: SDL Development List
Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 6:29 AM
Subject: Re: [SDL] Default struct packing alignment

On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 9:39 PM, R Manard <@R_Manard> wrote:

additioal info>>>>
By Katherine Noyes http://www.pcworld.com/author/Katherine-Noyes,
PCWorld http://www.pcworld.com/
Last month Microsoft caused considerable concern in the open sourcehttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256189/want_freedom_from_vendor_lockin_survey_says_choose_open_source.htmlcommunity when it made clear that the free, Express version of its upcoming
new Visual Studio development software would no longer offer supporthttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256339/microsoft_delivers_a_blow_to_open_source_with_visual_studio_11.htmlfor desktop-style applications.
and, the company suggested at the time that users of Visual Studio 11
Express would only be able to develop Metrohttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/240163/are_mobilestyle_interfaces_leaving_desktop_power_users_behind.htmlapplications.
Last Friday, however, Microsoft did what appears to be an about-face and
announced that a new, free-of-charge ?Windows Desktop? version of the
software–which has since been renamed Visual Studio Express 2012–will
support desktop-style applications after all.

and so once again microsoft tries to destroy open source and bid
to control all programs on all platforms >BEWARE<

Whoa, turn down the crazy. Nobody expects free and open source from
Microsoft. Yes, they have an agenda but they also have thousands of
employees’ paychecks to pay. If they want to charge for a product they
made, then so be it. As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are
plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to
applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it!

Patrick


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


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

The negativity wasn’t your opinion, but the fact that you hijacked a thread
and it seemed very trollish. If you had concerns, it probably would have
been better to start a new thread to talk about your concerns rather that
pulling a simple struct question into some sort of “Windows sucks because,
as a company, they have an agenda” discussion. I don’t even know if it’s
even a worth-while concern of the SDL community to even care whether or not
Windows 8 will support desktop-like applications - and since Windows is the
#1 gaming operating system, they are going to have to support SDL and
similar style libs to keep that ranking.

But anyway, next time, you may find it more mailing-list friendly to start
a new thread.
-AlexOn Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:51 PM, R Manard wrote:

Wow, I’m not defending myself or any opinion of mine. Some of the
negativity, like calling my opinion crazy, was uncalled for. That said,
what about sdl? the ms dev thing in relation to sdl, what say you?

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Alex Barry <@Alex_Barry> wrote:

I was originally going to reply, but then I thought we’d be dragging this
topic way off, but since we’re already there, here are my three cents.
First, Windows/Microsoft has always had a semi-closed source agenda.
Second, Apple has already done it, and no one really cared, and we can
still develop SDL-based apps for it no problem. Third, there’s no sense
starting an immature panic on a OS that hasn’t even been officially
released yet (outside of beta, anyway).
As much as we don’t want to admit it, Windows is the most popular
general-use operating system, and as a result, it typically has long term
support on it’s various OS versions (look at Windows XP, it’s still alive
and kicking).
And, an app-store model for an OS is actually a good idea - it keeps a
higher standard for mainstream applications, and people are still able to
install applications that don’t appear on the OS app-store.

Also, don’t troll and hijack threads.

-Alex

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Patrick Baggett < baggett.patrick at gmail.com> wrote:

I don’t know why I’m bothering to reply, since in T minus two emails
this will be a flamewar, oh well. I agree that every vendor wants no
competition and vendor lock in, including Microsoft. This will never
happen. Once again, " As long as people buy it, then it flies. There
are plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to
applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it! "

As far as I see, there is a strong, remarkable difference from
"Microsoft wants XYZ" and “Microsoft is going to destroy open source and
control all platforms and all programs.” That would literally require the
destruction of Linux, OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX,
Android, iOS, MacOS X; all hardware that can run OSes other than ones
Microsoft provides; and the destruction of all source code and binaries of
all programs that do not run on that Windows. Once again, ain’t gonna
happen
. So when some uses phrases like “all platforms” and “all
programs”, I find it absolutely ludicrous. Anyways, I’m done on this one,
I’m sure the OP didn’t actually intend to imply the above.

Patrick

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Mason Wheeler wrote:

There’s nothing crazy there. No one’s expecting Microsoft to create
open source software; what he’s saying is that they clearly want to make it
difficult for other people to create open source software, and establish a
closed iOS-style system where they control all software on the platform.
And there’s not much reason to believe that that’s not true.


From: Patrick Baggett <baggett.patrick at gmail.com>
To: SDL Development List
Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 6:29 AM
Subject: Re: [SDL] Default struct packing alignment

On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 9:39 PM, R Manard wrote:

additioal info>>>>
By Katherine Noyes http://www.pcworld.com/author/Katherine-Noyes,
PCWorld http://www.pcworld.com/
Last month Microsoft caused considerable concern in the open sourcehttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256189/want_freedom_from_vendor_lockin_survey_says_choose_open_source.htmlcommunity when it made clear that the free, Express version of its upcoming
new Visual Studio development software would no longer offer supporthttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256339/microsoft_delivers_a_blow_to_open_source_with_visual_studio_11.htmlfor desktop-style applications.
and, the company suggested at the time that users of Visual Studio 11
Express would only be able to develop Metrohttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/240163/are_mobilestyle_interfaces_leaving_desktop_power_users_behind.htmlapplications.
Last Friday, however, Microsoft did what appears to be an about-face
and announced that a new, free-of-charge ?Windows Desktop? version of the
software–which has since been renamed Visual Studio Express 2012–will
support desktop-style applications after all.

and so once again microsoft tries to destroy open source and bid
to control all programs on all platforms >BEWARE<

Whoa, turn down the crazy. Nobody expects free and open source from
Microsoft. Yes, they have an agenda but they also have thousands of
employees’ paychecks to pay. If they want to charge for a product they
made, then so be it. As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are
plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to
applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it!

Patrick


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


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


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

Alex you are wildly misinformed about what i did/said. This is an sdl
forum. Go flame somewhere else. Get into sdl or get out.On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Alex Barry <alex.barry at gmail.com> wrote:

The negativity wasn’t your opinion, but the fact that you hijacked a
thread and it seemed very trollish. If you had concerns, it probably would
have been better to start a new thread to talk about your concerns rather
that pulling a simple struct question into some sort of “Windows sucks
because, as a company, they have an agenda” discussion. I don’t even know
if it’s even a worth-while concern of the SDL community to even care
whether or not Windows 8 will support desktop-like applications - and since
Windows is the #1 gaming operating system, they are going to have to
support SDL and similar style libs to keep that ranking.

But anyway, next time, you may find it more mailing-list friendly to start
a new thread.
-Alex

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:51 PM, R Manard <@R_Manard> wrote:

Wow, I’m not defending myself or any opinion of mine. Some of the
negativity, like calling my opinion crazy, was uncalled for. That said,
what about sdl? the ms dev thing in relation to sdl, what say you?

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Alex Barry <alex.barry at gmail.com> wrote:

I was originally going to reply, but then I thought we’d be dragging
this topic way off, but since we’re already there, here are my three cents.
First, Windows/Microsoft has always had a semi-closed source agenda.
Second, Apple has already done it, and no one really cared, and we can
still develop SDL-based apps for it no problem. Third, there’s no sense
starting an immature panic on a OS that hasn’t even been officially
released yet (outside of beta, anyway).
As much as we don’t want to admit it, Windows is the most popular
general-use operating system, and as a result, it typically has long term
support on it’s various OS versions (look at Windows XP, it’s still alive
and kicking).
And, an app-store model for an OS is actually a good idea - it keeps a
higher standard for mainstream applications, and people are still able to
install applications that don’t appear on the OS app-store.

Also, don’t troll and hijack threads.

-Alex

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Patrick Baggett < baggett.patrick at gmail.com> wrote:

I don’t know why I’m bothering to reply, since in T minus two emails
this will be a flamewar, oh well. I agree that every vendor wants no
competition and vendor lock in, including Microsoft. This will never
happen. Once again, " As long as people buy it, then it flies. There
are plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to
applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it! "

As far as I see, there is a strong, remarkable difference from
"Microsoft wants XYZ" and “Microsoft is going to destroy open source and
control all platforms and all programs.” That would literally require the
destruction of Linux, OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX,
Android, iOS, MacOS X; all hardware that can run OSes other than ones
Microsoft provides; and the destruction of all source code and binaries of
all programs that do not run on that Windows. Once again, ain’t gonna
happen
. So when some uses phrases like “all platforms” and “all
programs”, I find it absolutely ludicrous. Anyways, I’m done on this one,
I’m sure the OP didn’t actually intend to imply the above.

Patrick

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Mason Wheeler wrote:

There’s nothing crazy there. No one’s expecting Microsoft to create
open source software; what he’s saying is that they clearly want to make it
difficult for other people to create open source software, and establish a
closed iOS-style system where they control all software on the platform.
And there’s not much reason to believe that that’s not true.


From: Patrick Baggett <baggett.patrick at gmail.com>
To: SDL Development List
Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 6:29 AM
Subject: Re: [SDL] Default struct packing alignment

On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 9:39 PM, R Manard <@R_Manard> wrote:

additioal info>>>>
By Katherine Noyes http://www.pcworld.com/author/Katherine-Noyes,
PCWorld http://www.pcworld.com/
Last month Microsoft caused considerable concern in the open sourcehttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256189/want_freedom_from_vendor_lockin_survey_says_choose_open_source.htmlcommunity when it made clear that the free, Express version of its upcoming
new Visual Studio development software would no longer offer supporthttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256339/microsoft_delivers_a_blow_to_open_source_with_visual_studio_11.htmlfor desktop-style applications.
and, the company suggested at the time that users of Visual Studio 11
Express would only be able to develop Metrohttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/240163/are_mobilestyle_interfaces_leaving_desktop_power_users_behind.htmlapplications.
Last Friday, however, Microsoft did what appears to be an about-face
and announced that a new, free-of-charge ?Windows Desktop? version of the
software–which has since been renamed Visual Studio Express 2012–will
support desktop-style applications after all.

and so once again microsoft tries to destroy open source and
bid to control all programs on all platforms >BEWARE<

Whoa, turn down the crazy. Nobody expects free and open source from
Microsoft. Yes, they have an agenda but they also have thousands of
employees’ paychecks to pay. If they want to charge for a product they
made, then so be it. As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are
plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to
applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it!

Patrick


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


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


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

It’s hard to be misinformed…I think the mailing list history speaks for
itself. The second post by you is a clipped article (not about structure
packing) with the following interpretation at the bottom: “and so once
again microsoft tries to destroy open source and bid to control all
programs on all platforms >BEWARE<”.

This was not about structure packing or anything technical at all, but
instead a quick blurb to support a personal opinion, and on an issue that
has no doubt started many such debates on mailing lists past. Your warning
I interpreted as irrational ranting in a public forum, and it just goes
downhill from there. I’m just much an offender of netiquette for
responding. Mistakes were made, threads were derailed. I apologize for
offending you, R. Manard. I meant to say that I disagree with your
conclusion above. It’s not always easy to see everyone’s intentions when
they write. I hope you can re-read your emails later when the issue isn’t
so close and see where people are coming from when they say things like
"hijacking a thread" and “seems trollish”, even if you disagree with them.

As for the structure packing issue [RESOLVED:NOTABUG]. Yay!

PatrickOn Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 6:07 PM, R Manard wrote:

Alex you are wildly misinformed about what i did/said. This is an sdl
forum. Go flame somewhere else. Get into sdl or get out.

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Alex Barry <alex.barry at gmail.com> wrote:

The negativity wasn’t your opinion, but the fact that you hijacked a
thread and it seemed very trollish. If you had concerns, it probably would
have been better to start a new thread to talk about your concerns rather
that pulling a simple struct question into some sort of “Windows sucks
because, as a company, they have an agenda” discussion. I don’t even know
if it’s even a worth-while concern of the SDL community to even care
whether or not Windows 8 will support desktop-like applications - and since
Windows is the #1 gaming operating system, they are going to have to
support SDL and similar style libs to keep that ranking.

But anyway, next time, you may find it more mailing-list friendly to
start a new thread.
-Alex

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:51 PM, R Manard wrote:

Wow, I’m not defending myself or any opinion of mine. Some of the
negativity, like calling my opinion crazy, was uncalled for. That said,
what about sdl? the ms dev thing in relation to sdl, what say you?

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Alex Barry <alex.barry at gmail.com> wrote:

I was originally going to reply, but then I thought we’d be dragging
this topic way off, but since we’re already there, here are my three cents.
First, Windows/Microsoft has always had a semi-closed source agenda.
Second, Apple has already done it, and no one really cared, and we can
still develop SDL-based apps for it no problem. Third, there’s no sense
starting an immature panic on a OS that hasn’t even been officially
released yet (outside of beta, anyway).
As much as we don’t want to admit it, Windows is the most popular
general-use operating system, and as a result, it typically has long term
support on it’s various OS versions (look at Windows XP, it’s still alive
and kicking).
And, an app-store model for an OS is actually a good idea - it keeps a
higher standard for mainstream applications, and people are still able to
install applications that don’t appear on the OS app-store.

Also, don’t troll and hijack threads.

-Alex

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Patrick Baggett < @Patrick_Baggett> wrote:

I don’t know why I’m bothering to reply, since in T minus two emails
this will be a flamewar, oh well. I agree that every vendor wants no
competition and vendor lock in, including Microsoft. This will never
happen. Once again, " As long as people buy it, then it flies.
There are plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming
languages to applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it!
"

As far as I see, there is a strong, remarkable difference from
"Microsoft wants XYZ" and “Microsoft is going to destroy open source and
control all platforms and all programs.” That would literally require the
destruction of Linux, OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX,
Android, iOS, MacOS X; all hardware that can run OSes other than ones
Microsoft provides; and the destruction of all source code and binaries of
all programs that do not run on that Windows. Once again, ain’t
gonna happen
. So when some uses phrases like “all platforms” and
"all programs", I find it absolutely ludicrous. Anyways, I’m done on this
one, I’m sure the OP didn’t actually intend to imply the above.

Patrick

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Mason Wheeler <masonwheeler at yahoo.com wrote:

There’s nothing crazy there. No one’s expecting Microsoft to create
open source software; what he’s saying is that they clearly want to make it
difficult for other people to create open source software, and establish a
closed iOS-style system where they control all software on the platform.
And there’s not much reason to believe that that’s not true.


From: Patrick Baggett <@Patrick_Baggett>
To: SDL Development List
Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 6:29 AM
Subject: Re: [SDL] Default struct packing alignment

On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 9:39 PM, R Manard wrote:

additioal info>>>>
By Katherine Noyes http://www.pcworld.com/author/Katherine-Noyes,
PCWorld http://www.pcworld.com/
Last month Microsoft caused considerable concern in the open sourcehttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256189/want_freedom_from_vendor_lockin_survey_says_choose_open_source.htmlcommunity when it made clear that the free, Express version of its upcoming
new Visual Studio development software would no longer offer supporthttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256339/microsoft_delivers_a_blow_to_open_source_with_visual_studio_11.htmlfor desktop-style applications.
and, the company suggested at the time that users of Visual Studio 11
Express would only be able to develop Metrohttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/240163/are_mobilestyle_interfaces_leaving_desktop_power_users_behind.htmlapplications.
Last Friday, however, Microsoft did what appears to be an about-face
and announced that a new, free-of-charge ?Windows Desktop? version of the
software–which has since been renamed Visual Studio Express 2012–will
support desktop-style applications after all.

and so once again microsoft tries to destroy open source and
bid to control all programs on all platforms >BEWARE<

Whoa, turn down the crazy. Nobody expects free and open source from
Microsoft. Yes, they have an agenda but they also have thousands of
employees’ paychecks to pay. If they want to charge for a product they
made, then so be it. As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are
plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to
applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it!

Patrick


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


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


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


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

Hi,

very interested in your OpenGL 3.2 contexts patch, and happy to test it out
:slight_smile:

cheers,On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Sam Lantinga wrote:

The best way is to create a bug in bugzilla (http://bugzilla.libsdl.org)
and then send a message to the mailing list so people can check it out.

Keeping it in bugzilla means that when Ryan or I do a pass on bugs we’ll
see it, and a note to the mailing list gets other eyes on it for feedback.

Cheers!

On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Samuel Payson wrote:

Hello Denizens of the SDL Mailing List!

My name is Sam Payson, and I’ve got a patch that allows the creation of
OpenGL 3.2 contexts under OS X. How should I go about getting this
reviewed/sent upstream? Please inform me if I’m posting this in the wrong
place.

Sincerely,
Sam


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

It’s hard to be misinformed yet you are. The author did not seem to
understand what the ms dev thing was, being that it was presented as if it
were a platform. It was confused with an os. The article was on the topic
of the post being that it was aboout the thing then autor believed there
should be an effort to be in full comptability with. No hijack or troll. It
was an attemt to let him know what was being said on his topic. I gave what
was clearly stated as an opinion at the end. If you don’t agree that’s
fine. I will not apologize for having an opinion or having stated it. Again
and again I have stated that If you have something to add on the topic
please bring it forward. Shame on you for complaining about all of this but
simply continueing the flame with no topic input. Let’s put this behind us.

I want to talk about ms metro dev and sdl. I don’t think sdl should care
about it since it’s not a platform. Do you have anything to say about
that? I haven’t seen anything that says there is an sdl bug on this topic
or that this said bug is resolved. If there is someone please forward or
direct me.

I understand how a guy could think the ms dev thing is an os because it
looks like they promote it with language that insinuates it is so (in my
opinion).On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Patrick Baggett <baggett.patrick at gmail.com>wrote:

It’s hard to be misinformed…I think the mailing list history speaks for
itself. The second post by you is a clipped article (not about structure
packing) with the following interpretation at the bottom: “and so once
again microsoft tries to destroy open source and bid to control all
programs on all platforms >BEWARE<”.

This was not about structure packing or anything technical at all, but
instead a quick blurb to support a personal opinion, and on an issue that
has no doubt started many such debates on mailing lists past. Your warning
I interpreted as irrational ranting in a public forum, and it just goes
downhill from there. I’m just much an offender of netiquette for
responding. Mistakes were made, threads were derailed. I apologize for
offending you, R. Manard. I meant to say that I disagree with your
conclusion above. It’s not always easy to see everyone’s intentions when
they write. I hope you can re-read your emails later when the issue isn’t
so close and see where people are coming from when they say things like
"hijacking a thread" and “seems trollish”, even if you disagree with them.

As for the structure packing issue [RESOLVED:NOTABUG]. Yay!

Patrick

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 6:07 PM, R Manard <@R_Manard> wrote:

Alex you are wildly misinformed about what i did/said. This is an sdl
forum. Go flame somewhere else. Get into sdl or get out.

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Alex Barry <alex.barry at gmail.com> wrote:

The negativity wasn’t your opinion, but the fact that you hijacked a
thread and it seemed very trollish. If you had concerns, it probably would
have been better to start a new thread to talk about your concerns rather
that pulling a simple struct question into some sort of “Windows sucks
because, as a company, they have an agenda” discussion. I don’t even know
if it’s even a worth-while concern of the SDL community to even care
whether or not Windows 8 will support desktop-like applications - and since
Windows is the #1 gaming operating system, they are going to have to
support SDL and similar style libs to keep that ranking.

But anyway, next time, you may find it more mailing-list friendly to
start a new thread.
-Alex

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:51 PM, R Manard <@R_Manard> wrote:

Wow, I’m not defending myself or any opinion of mine. Some of the
negativity, like calling my opinion crazy, was uncalled for. That said,
what about sdl? the ms dev thing in relation to sdl, what say you?

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Alex Barry <alex.barry at gmail.com>wrote:

I was originally going to reply, but then I thought we’d be dragging
this topic way off, but since we’re already there, here are my three cents.
First, Windows/Microsoft has always had a semi-closed source agenda.
Second, Apple has already done it, and no one really cared, and we can
still develop SDL-based apps for it no problem. Third, there’s no sense
starting an immature panic on a OS that hasn’t even been officially
released yet (outside of beta, anyway).
As much as we don’t want to admit it, Windows is the most popular
general-use operating system, and as a result, it typically has long term
support on it’s various OS versions (look at Windows XP, it’s still alive
and kicking).
And, an app-store model for an OS is actually a good idea - it keeps a
higher standard for mainstream applications, and people are still able to
install applications that don’t appear on the OS app-store.

Also, don’t troll and hijack threads.

-Alex

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Patrick Baggett < baggett.patrick at gmail.com> wrote:

I don’t know why I’m bothering to reply, since in T minus two emails
this will be a flamewar, oh well. I agree that every vendor wants no
competition and vendor lock in, including Microsoft. This will never
happen. Once again, " As long as people buy it, then it flies.
There are plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming
languages to applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it!
"

As far as I see, there is a strong, remarkable difference from
"Microsoft wants XYZ" and “Microsoft is going to destroy open source and
control all platforms and all programs.” That would literally require the
destruction of Linux, OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX,
Android, iOS, MacOS X; all hardware that can run OSes other than ones
Microsoft provides; and the destruction of all source code and binaries of
all programs that do not run on that Windows. Once again, ain’t
gonna happen
. So when some uses phrases like “all platforms” and
"all programs", I find it absolutely ludicrous. Anyways, I’m done on this
one, I’m sure the OP didn’t actually intend to imply the above.

Patrick

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Mason Wheeler < masonwheeler at yahoo.com> wrote:

There’s nothing crazy there. No one’s expecting Microsoft to create
open source software; what he’s saying is that they clearly want to make it
difficult for other people to create open source software, and establish a
closed iOS-style system where they control all software on the platform.
And there’s not much reason to believe that that’s not true.


From: Patrick Baggett <baggett.patrick at gmail.com>
To: SDL Development List
Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 6:29 AM
Subject: Re: [SDL] Default struct packing alignment

On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 9:39 PM, R Manard <@R_Manard>wrote:

additioal info>>>>
By Katherine Noyes http://www.pcworld.com/author/Katherine-Noyes,
PCWorld http://www.pcworld.com/
Last month Microsoft caused considerable concern in the open sourcehttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256189/want_freedom_from_vendor_lockin_survey_says_choose_open_source.htmlcommunity when it made clear that the free, Express version of its upcoming
new Visual Studio development software would no longer offer supporthttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/256339/microsoft_delivers_a_blow_to_open_source_with_visual_studio_11.htmlfor desktop-style applications.
and, the company suggested at the time that users of Visual Studio
11 Express would only be able to develop Metrohttp://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/240163/are_mobilestyle_interfaces_leaving_desktop_power_users_behind.htmlapplications.
Last Friday, however, Microsoft did what appears to be an about-face
and announced that a new, free-of-charge ?Windows Desktop? version of the
software–which has since been renamed Visual Studio Express 2012–will
support desktop-style applications after all.

and so once again microsoft tries to destroy open source and
bid to control all programs on all platforms >BEWARE<

Whoa, turn down the crazy. Nobody expects free and open source from
Microsoft. Yes, they have an agenda but they also have thousands of
employees’ paychecks to pay. If they want to charge for a product they
made, then so be it. As long as people buy it, then it flies. There are
plenty of alternatives available, from OSes to programming languages to
applications. What a wonderful world we live in. Enjoy it!

Patrick


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


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


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


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 want to talk about ms metro dev and sdl. I don’t think sdl should care
about it since it’s not a platform. Do you have anything to say about
that? I haven’t seen anything that says there is an sdl bug on this topic
or that this said bug is resolved. If there is someone please forward or
direct me.

Well, I wouldn’t expect for an explicit bug report or “NO” from anyone.
It’s a community driven project, largely the cost of supporting the unusual
platforms is zero to the uninterested. SDL supports some real oddballs;
immediately nixing Metro would seem arbitrary, especially if people stepped
up to provide necessary time and effort to make it a stable target.

The issue I see with SDL supporting it is that the current Win32 APIs seem
to now be marked with whether they are supported on Metro and/or Desktop.
SDL’s Win32 code is written for (what is retroactively labeled) “desktop”,
and to ensure compatibility with Metro, an audit of API usage would be
required, or at least attempt to compile under ARM with VS2012 and see what
breaks. As far as I can see, that is the major technical hurdle for SDL. As
for the question of “should” – well, I dislike the Metro idea personally,
but it isn’t up to me or you to decide. People who care about it as a
supported target for SDL can write code for it, just as it was done for the
iPhone and Android targets. If there is no interested parties or $ to hire
a developer to do the port, then I guess Metro remains excluded.

Patrick

This might not be correct, but from what I’ve seen, I think that OpenGL is “desktop-only”.? So SDL for Metro would require a special Metro-specific build with all the OpenGL functionality disabled, or it would fail to load.________________________________
From: Patrick Baggett <baggett.patrick at gmail.com>
To: SDL Development List
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 7:45 AM
Subject: Re: [SDL] Default struct packing alignment

I want to talk about ms metro dev and sdl. I don’t think sdl should care about it since it’s not a platform.?Do you have anything to say about that??I haven’t seen anything that says there is an sdl bug on this topic or that this said bug is resolved. If there is someone please forward or direct me.

Well, I wouldn’t expect for an explicit bug report or “NO” from anyone. It’s a community driven project, largely the cost of supporting the unusual platforms is zero to the uninterested. SDL supports some real oddballs; immediately nixing Metro would seem arbitrary, especially if people stepped up to provide necessary time and effort to make it a stable target.

The issue I see with SDL supporting it is that the current Win32 APIs seem to now be marked with whether they are supported on Metro and/or Desktop. SDL’s Win32 code is written for (what is retroactively labeled) “desktop”, and to ensure?compatibility?with Metro, an audit of API usage would be required, or at least attempt to compile under ARM with VS2012 and see what breaks. As far as I can see, that is the major technical hurdle for SDL. As for the question of “should” – well, I dislike the Metro idea personally, but it isn’t up to me or you to decide. People who care about it as a supported target for SDL can write code for it, just as it was done for the iPhone and Android targets. If there is no interested parties or $ to hire a developer to do the port, then I guess Metro remains excluded.

Patrick


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

Hi Patrick,

I’m perfectly aware that it was Windows default value for very long time -
I said that now it is MANDATORY for all applications, using any new
feature/interface/include from WintRT. If you change this in
project settings to any other value it will trigger a C3621 compiler error
(only the default packing value (8) is allowed for WinRT types).
It means that any glue/interface to SDL needs to use WinRT and it can
cause incompatibilities and many hard to track & locate errors if the
other part of the application will use 4 bytes packing.
P.On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, Patrick Baggett wrote:

First off, I’m pretty sure it has been 8 on Windows for a while. If SDL is
properly coded, then this is not an issue. This is the way it should look:

<Windows.h> {

pack(push, whatever)

...structs here...

pack(pop)

}

<SDL.h> {

pack(push, 4)

...structs here...

pack(pop)

}

The only way the structure sizes would mismatch is if the push/pop was not
done properly. Also,
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa296569(v=vs.60).aspx “The default
pack size for Windows 3.x is 2, whereas the default for Win32 is 8.” and
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/2e70t5y1(v=vs.80).aspx “The default
value for n is 8.” – looks like it has been 8 for a long while.

In short, the Windows headers must set packing to 8. They do so
programmatically regardless of what you set the default packing to. SDL
doesn’t need to do anything else unless it feels like it.

Patrick

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:09 PM, <@Piotr_Drapich> wrote:

Hi Sam,
It seems that for Windows 8 Metro development struct pack alignment >must<
be set to 8 bytes now. SDL uses 4 bytes alignment set in
begin_code.h and there might be alignment issues in passing events caused
by this new requirement on this platform - maybe it would be worth to
switch in SDL to 8 bytes alignment too?

regards,
Piotr


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org