Thanks for pointing that out.
Since I left university (1999), I was forced to move slowly back into
Windows as
my main OS, because of some of my hobbies. So I tend not to follow all Linux
developments
as I used to.I assume that the only way to manage 2D acceleration in Linux would be with
the
XRender extension, right?
Actually, the best way to make sure you have hardware acceleration
under X is still to use OpenGL.
In '99 setting up 3D graphics drivers on Linux was still fairly
difficult. For quite sometime installing the NVidia drivers has been
simple and now that the ATI drivers are being/have been opened up
installing them is also simple.
The fact is that while a few Linux distribution still seem to want to
make using your computer difficult, the leading distros, especially
Ubuntu, wil detect and install all the drivers needed by your machine.
That includes the full set of the notoriously difficult 3D and
wireless drivers.
So, really, if you want to work on Linux use SDL and OpenGL and you
have full access to the abilities of your graphics card.
Pretty much everything else in X is currently up in the air. A major
redesign of everything to do with graphics acceleration and the X
server has recently been completed and work is under ways to move X
toward âthe promised landâ The glory of open source is that it is
not a product, but a process. The main problem with open source is
that it is not a product, but a processâŠ
Right now on Linux, OpenGL works, it works very well, accelerated
OpenGL is ubiquitous and supported by all the major 3D graphics
vendors.
So, I for one, wouldnât mess with anything else.
I know that a lot of people seem to have trouble with the idea of
using a 3D API for 2D work. (I am not directing this at you, or any
one in specific.) Usually, I hear that it seems rather heavy for the
job. They are worried about weighing down their code with slow 3D
operations when they want quick 2D operations. The logic seems
reasonable because 3D is harder to do than 2D. The reality is that
your computer probably has 10s to 100s or special purpose processors
designed to off load that âheavyâ work. The graphics processor on a
modern PC may well out perform the main CPU on floating pointer
operations by a factor of several hundred to several thousand times.
It is sort of like find out that your 1968 VW bug has a Mac truck in
the trunk⊠Which is very handy when you find you need to haul
several tons of rocks, but how did it get in there�
Not suggesting, just asking, how would people like a simple 2D API
that is compatible with SDL but uses OpenGL for all operations. What
would you want in it? And, most importantly, what would be in it that
isnât already in SDL?
Bob PendletonOn Sat, May 9, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
â
PauloOn Fri, May 8, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Pierre Phaneuf wrote:
Many of the old 2D acelerated operations are no longer there. If you are
lucky youâll get hardware cursors and the most common GUI operations
accelerated,
everything else are pure 3D operations.Note that in games, 2D acceleration was very rarely used! SDL could
use it, mostly on Windows with the DirectDraw backend, but itâs been
replaced by a pretty much entirely software GDI backend. It was pretty
awful, though, having a game that would work fine on Windows, then
boot into Linux on the same machine and have it be unbearably slowâŠ
So you just had to do like everyone, assume no acceleration and code
like the good old DOS days!â
http://pphaneuf.livejournal.com/
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
â
±----------------------------------------------------------
- Bob Pendleton: writer and programmer
- email: Bob at Pendleton.com
- web: www.TheGrumpyProgrammer.com