Proposition for SDL_math, the author speaks out

Hi, once again.
You don’t see me defending too much SDL_math because I
can only see my mail from time to time, and then only
reply to a few mails.

I think that the discussion is a way off what I original
intented. When I thought about it I was thinking about
creating a math library specilized in 2D and 3D math, namely
matrix and vector manipulations, and that’s it. I don’t
intend to develop a math library to compete with Linpak, or
Blitz++, or whatever.

The idea of calling it SDL_math was because I thought that
it would be nice having some math support in SDL, as NVidia
has in its NVToolkit. The C choice only appeared because SDL
is coded in C, nothing more. I would rather use C++.

Reading all the posts has been very instructive, because
I got some new ideas and gave up on others.

So the name SDL_math isn’t a good one because there aren’t
any dependecies to it.
Since I rather use C++ over C, and I won’t call it SDL_math
then I will use C++.
It will only support operations over points, vectors and matrices
in 2D/3D space, with the possibility of using homogeneous coordinates.

Thanks for the discussion it was very helpfull.–
Paulo Pinto, uRD Software Engineer
Altitude Software (formerly Easyphone)

paulo.pinto at

The opinions expressed by myself are personal and not of my employer.
Programming languages teach you not to want what they cannot provide.