I HATE TO BREAK THE PARTY UP - but
BlitzMax Forums/BlitzMax Programming/I HATE TO BREAK THE PARTY UP - but
| ||
 The return of the pup. |
| ||
| Oh Puki... it also says The end product will be a multi-platform b3dsdk-like library with bindings for various languages. . Now I would be VERY annoyed if that didn't include Bmax. |
| ||
| Er, that's annoying puki. Mark, please shed some light on the future of BlitzMax. Hundreds of us have supported your vision from the start and some of us now make a living off of it. We cannot just have BlitzMax swept into the corner and forgotten. If C++ is so much faster than BlitzMax, why not spend some time optimizing it to get more speed from it? I have been patiently awaiting a new update (I do not use the SVN updates; I prefer to wait for full update releases). When can we expect the next update? |
| ||
| When can we expect the next update? Seb just posted an update the other day. |
| ||
| Well as it is written in C++ and crossplatform, Mark could basically make it a Userlib for Blitz3D similar to other solutions. That would actually be the best in several ways: 1. it can be sold for other systems (planned anyway, Blitz3D is not crossplatform ^^) 2. Blitz3D users can incorporate both renderers and fallback to DX7 where needed 3. BlitzPlus users could finally have 3d support and Blitz3D programmers would have a way to create definitely far more professional editors either through BlitzPlus or BlitzMax Important thing would be to not use Blitz3D 2.0 ... because that version is already reserved for the totally bugged 1.99 down-date which broke more than it solved. |
| ||
| BlitzPlus users could finally have 3d support Don't they already have that with the 3D SDK? |
| ||
| Sounds good, but isn't Ogre3D already doing this? |
| ||
| B3D SDK is no option. If I wanted to have a broken B3D I would use B3D 1.64 or 1.99 not 1.98. The SDK was a very nice idea but it seems like the problems you have to face when binding against other languages are a little larger than expected, otherwise the callback issue wouldn't still be present at least according the board. (I own blitz3d so I didn't invest in the SDK, no interest to port several ten tousand lines of code) |
| ||
| puki, I can understand your 'touch myself'-ness about Blitz3D, but this is not a general discussion sub-forum and has nothing to do with BlitzMax. |
| ||
| mmm....I could create an image (but I dont' want...) with '3d Engine for BlitzMax!' written in big letters... This thread is - really - useless in my opinion :) - considering that there is NONE 3d engine at the moment... |
| ||
| puki, I can understand your 'touch myself'-ness about Blitz3D, but this is not a general discussion sub-forum and has nothing to do with BlitzMax. And is plain wrong. B3D 2.0 is only a suggested as a possibility after b3d2 sdk is out. So puki can (and probably will) be touching himself until Christmas '09. |
| ||
| @degac: in 5 days there will be the one |
| ||
| @degac: in 5 days there will be the one Depending on what degac was referring to when he said "there is NONE 3d engine at the moment...", there are 3d engines that can be used in BlitzMax just none are official. If you think about Leadwerks though it is the most BlitzMax oriented. But like others can be used in other languages.I would still say there isn't really an engine for BlitzMax after Leadwerks gets released, as it is not cross-platform. The point of BlitzMax is to be cross-platform, minib3d is the best solution for BlitzMax atm. Possibly Flow in the future. |
| ||
| It is true that it's not cross-platform. But there are efforts after the release to make it also cross-platform. It's also a question of customer inquiries, and at the moment the sad but true truth is that most customers are using Windows. Technically there is no big effort to compile Leadwerks for Mac or Linux, but it will also take some time to test and verify that it works. I've seen pure BlitzMax programs behave differently on Windows, Mac and Linux, which is not that big surprise anyway. |
| ||
| there are 3d engines that can be used in BlitzMax just none are official. This is not true, the current 3DSDK for BMax is an official product and solution. |
| ||
| Ah yes.. theres that. I was referring mostly to next/current-gen engines. |
| ||
| there is a serious effort making leadwerks crossplattform. You can not generate .so and .dylibs with it only DLL which is the major hurdle that has to be taken (beside the needed rewrites / alternative implementations to make it run on OSX as OSX OpenGL needs some specific things due to its OpenGL implementation) |
| ||
| It can be converted with realistic efforts to C/C++. I don't know how different OSX OpenGL is, but so far all my little OpenGL test programs written in C/C++ ran using the same source code on Windows and Linux. |
| ||
| I do recall halo saying alot of it was done in blitzmax.. I'm pretty sure (if it contains brl stuff) that its illegal to write a dll/so/dylib with it. |
| ||
| so and dylib can not even be made with it. And it is not illegal, its just illegal with the regular license but you can contact BRL for a special one. But lets see what comes out at the end of marks work. definitely sounds interesting and much more promissing than another editor by BRL (sorry Mark and the rest of BRL, but editors are definitely not your strength, the IDE is as bad as maplet ...) |
| ||
| And it is not illegal, its just illegal with the regular license but you can contact BRL for a special one. So.. yes in other words it is illegal without a special license. |
| ||
| Compiling dylib/so files is only a problem if I want to support C++ programming in Mac and Linux. To compile Mac and Linux versions for BlitzMax I basically just have to press the F5 key in another OS. Regarding the dll issue, I think Mark just doesn't want someone wrapping the BlitzMax modules and selling them as a dll. I try to avoid using BRL's modules except when it is necessary for consistency for BlitzMax programmers. I emailed him a long time ago, told him what BRL functionality I intended to expose in the dll, and he wrote back saying "go for it". |
| ||
| Interesting. I think we need a really good explanation on what exactly the license is saying, because I'd really like to wrap some of the handy functions/tools I've written over the past few years. From what you say it seems fine to do so :D |
| ||
| *ahem* Hi, Ok, to clarify things a bit: * Priority 1 is writing a new 3d lib, with an underlying 'b3d-like' design. * Priority 2 is wrapping it up as a Max module. * Priority 3 is wrapping it up for other languages. When I mentioned 'Blitz3D2' in the worklog, I was thinking about swapping out the current 3d engine in Blitz3D for the new one - language/IDE remain the same. Haven't given this much serious thought (and probably shouldn't have mentioned it) as Max/3D kind of renders the idea redundant. Still, there may be people who prefer the simpler b3d language and ide? And...there is definitely NOT a new language coming! Bye! Mark Sibly, Blitz Research Ltd Us Max'ers will get it first*. :-P *unless priority 1 includes releasing to C++ peeps. |
| ||
| Blitz3D2.0 will conquer and dominate. |
| ||
| Sorry to disappoint you such, but it seems Blitz3D is on the *afterburner*. We win. |
   |