Talks about getting a lightweight graphics library in the C++ standard
Pages: 12
closed account (3qX21hU5)
https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/forum/#!topic/graphics/khpaiq5HRpE
Was reading through it today and seemed interesting though in all reality if this did pass the committee it wouldn't be implemented in C++14 and it might not even make it into the next one after that >_<
Was reading through it today and seemed interesting though in all reality if this did pass the committee it wouldn't be implemented in C++14 and it might not even make it into the next one after that >_<
This would definitely be interesting and I think would be a great step for the language. Who knows if it'll ever pass though
closed account (N36fSL3A)
I personally wouldn't like it. Wouldn't it just bloat the lib?
I'd like to keep things as compact as possible, and graphics libs are going too far.
I'd like to keep things as compact as possible, and graphics libs are going too far.
| @Lumpkin I personally wouldn't like it. Wouldn't it just bloat the lib? |
I think the same way. I do not see reasons that some graphic library should be included in C++. I think this initiative is activated by Microsoft that to make more closer C# and C++/CLI.
Last edited on
If you want "compact", use C. C++ isn't known for its lack of bloat...
If you don't want to use any new feature the language adds, then don't use it.
If you don't want to use any new feature the language adds, then don't use it.
| C++ isn't known for its lack of bloat... |
Ummm.... yes it is?
One of its major goals is that you don't pay for what you don't use.
I think that like many things in C++ if you don't want to use the standard graphics library you won't have to and the addition of implementation support for it won't affect your program in a negative way.
closed account (N36fSL3A)
I feel it'd just be going too far. If you want graphics just use OpenGL/Direct X. C++ wouldn't feel like C++ without it.
They're not removing or hindering anything that exists, I don't understand your complaint.
closed account (N36fSL3A)
I understand they aren't.
Actually, before I continue, what do you mean by "small graphics library?"
Seriously, 3D? That seems kinda big. I don't know why they would consider adding this.
Actually, before I continue, what do you mean by "small graphics library?"
| They wrote: |
|---|
| 2D graphics + text + planes. It shouldn't aim to be all-encompassing like a big-F Framework, but should leave the door open to: (a) a related 3D TS; and (b) using this as a 2D HUD layer over a 3D engine. |
closed account (3qX21hU5)
@Lumpkin
They aren't proposing a full fledged graphics API like directX or openGL.
They are proposing a very lightweight implementation of 2D graphics and layers mainly to be used to draw GUI's, not games or anything of that nature. So it wouldn't be replacing directX or openGL and they don't want to replace any of the existing libraries anyways.
That is your opinion I guess but I don't know I just don't understand when people don't like change. Programming languages NEED to change in order to stay relevant and useful with the times. If they don't they will die out.
So ya not adding anything to C++ would keep it the way you know it but after 10 years or so would it still be in wide use?
Anyways I think it would be a interesting idea and I quite like it. Mainly because it would give beginners something more to look at when they are learning then just the plain old console (Which lets face it isn't the most exciting thing to see after awhile).
Umm did you even read your quote?
They aren't proposing a full fledged graphics API like directX or openGL.
They are proposing a very lightweight implementation of 2D graphics and layers mainly to be used to draw GUI's, not games or anything of that nature. So it wouldn't be replacing directX or openGL and they don't want to replace any of the existing libraries anyways.
| C++ wouldn't feel like C++ without it. |
That is your opinion I guess but I don't know I just don't understand when people don't like change. Programming languages NEED to change in order to stay relevant and useful with the times. If they don't they will die out.
So ya not adding anything to C++ would keep it the way you know it but after 10 years or so would it still be in wide use?
Anyways I think it would be a interesting idea and I quite like it. Mainly because it would give beginners something more to look at when they are learning then just the plain old console (Which lets face it isn't the most exciting thing to see after awhile).
| Seriously, 3D? That seems kinda big. I don't know why they would consider adding this. |
Umm did you even read your quote?
Last edited on
closed account (N36fSL3A)
I did, but I saw 3D and I automatically thought it was going to be a 3D api.
Anyway, if any lib is gonna be added I'd like to see a networking API.
Anyway, if any lib is gonna be added I'd like to see a networking API.
Last edited on
closed account (2b5z8vqX)
| Anyway, if any lib is gonna be added I'd like to see a networking API. |
You will soon see a networking library added to the C++ Standard Library.
| In addition to completing the C++14 CD document, the committee also made progress on three additional important parallel specifications that are on track to be published around the same time as C++14: - File system library (draft), based on Boost.FileSystem version 3. - Networking library, small at first and regularly extended. - “Concepts Lite” language extensions (draft), to express template constraints and improve template usability and error messages. |
I definitely think a basic 2D library should be added to the standard. Although I code almost exclusively command-line programs, most people use exclusively graphical ones, and it seems silly that C++ only natively supports the one that fewer people use. Beginners should be able to do basic graphical stuff without having to install additional libraries. Then, C++ tutorials would teach beginners to use both systems at the outset rather than keeping the GUI as an afterthought.
But can we get a container whose size is fixed at runtime first? Also, certain Boost libraries do some things with templates which sort of extend the syntax of the language (see Boost.Python, Boost.Program_options) and I'd like to see that concept expanded upon.
But can we get a container whose size is fixed at runtime first? Also, certain Boost libraries do some things with templates which sort of extend the syntax of the language (see Boost.Python, Boost.Program_options) and I'd like to see that concept expanded upon.
Last edited on
closed account (N36fSL3A)
| - File system library (draft), based on Boost.FileSystem version 3. |
Will this require porting my programs that use fstream? D:
No, it'll just add a portable path class and some functions for finding out about files. The streams will be left alone. It's basically going to be Boost.Filesystem but in the std namespace instead of the boost::filesystem one. Also fstream will probably accept std::paths as well as strings.
closed account (3qX21hU5)
They are file system paths (IE Boost.FileSystem ;p). Basically providing capability to able to browse the file system of the computer which should really be in the standard in my opinion.
Last edited on
closed account (N36fSL3A)
| They are file system paths (IE Boost.FileSystem ;p). Basically providing capability to able to browse the file system of the computer which should really be in the standard in my opinion. |
That would have saved so many of my project's deaths right there.
Pages: 12