• Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  

SFML 2.1

This topic is 1443 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Advertisement

I've had no issues thusly with any of the modules. I would avoid their threading stuff now though, since c++11 threads are pretty good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using them to make a project cross-platform for fun, having no problem on my mac and on my win system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had no issues thusly with any of the modules. I would avoid their threading stuff now though, since c++11 threads are pretty good.

The downside to C++11 threads is that, as the name suggests, they're only available on C++11-enabled compilers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I've had no issues thusly with any of the modules. I would avoid their threading stuff now though, since c++11 threads are pretty good.

The downside to C++11 threads is that, as the name suggests, they're only available on C++11-enabled compilers.

 

 

True, but since we are having this conversation in 2014, that should be OK. :)

 

There are many other good things in C++11 (smart pointers, for loops, move semantics...) and I strongly encourage people to transition to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, the problem with std::threads is that they are really not very well supported (at least on Windows).

You can pick MSVC (in which case you have std::thread, but miss out on quite a few other things normally included in C++11).

You can alternatively pick MinGW. The 'default' MinGW does not include std::thread and has no plans to support them in the foreseeable future. The alternative is a perfectly fine replacement but they also don't have the most performant implementation right now (pthread vs native constructs).

Of course, there are boost::threads which should be pretty much identical to the std version but work fine on every platform.

Edit: as to the original question: personally, I would either use either std::thread or boost::thread. I would not consider using SFML threads.

Edit 2: never mind, conflated a few threads in my head and should have skimmed it again before adding that. Edited by BitMaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Edit: as to the original question: personally, I would either use either std::thread or boost::thread. I would not consider using SFML threads.

 

That had nothing to do with the original question.  SFML is a great API IMO.  I would wholeheartedly recommend it to anyone using C++.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me in SFML there are several stupid things

 

its a int mixing with float in texture size(why these cast)

and

texture coordinates are defined in pixels (they are not normalized (between 0.0 and 1.0f), as people who are used to graphics programming would expect).

Edited by serumas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

texture coordinates are defined in pixels (they are not normalized (between 0.0 and 1.0f), as people who are used to graphics programming would expect).


Firstly, according to the TheComet's link to the documentation, using pixel or normalized coordinates is a choice. Secondly, since SFML has a strong focus on being a reasonable library for 2D game development, having a default value of pixel-based sounds extremely reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use SFML 2.1 and I think it is fantastic. I use all parts of it and have not had any issues thus far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 


texture coordinates are defined in pixels (they are not normalized (between 0.0 and 1.0f), as people who are used to graphics programming would expect).

http://www.sfml-dev.org/documentation/2.1/classsf_1_1Texture.php#aa6fd3bbe3c334b3c4428edfb2765a82e

 

 

what about veretex, are there normalized texture coords? Think no , becouse I just copied that sentence directly from them documentation. Or its only in new version?

Edited by serumas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


texture coordinates are defined in pixels (they are not normalized (between 0.0 and 1.0f), as people who are used to graphics programming would expect).

http://www.sfml-dev.org/documentation/2.1/classsf_1_1Texture.php#aa6fd3bbe3c334b3c4428edfb2765a82e

 

 

what about veretex, are there normalized texture coords? Think no , becouse I just copied that sentence directly from them documentation. Or its only in new version?

 

What do you mean?

 

I've constructed a manual mesh in SFML before and the UV coordinates were always normalized. It's how graphics cards work.

 

And besides, you can just convert between them by dividing/multiplying by the width/height of the image.

Edited by TheComet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use SFML 2.1 as my primary C++ windowing library for OpenGL programs, and I quite like it. It requires no boilerplate because it uses RAII, which I really appreciate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement