LÖVE

And as I said, it's mostly a matter of compiler macros, and you're done. So, it's not like it's an awful lot of work. (assuming you used standard c++ for the rest of the code) In the next version you might just be able to compile it at runtime, which increases cross-platformness!

bartbes wrote:And as I said, it's mostly a matter of compiler macros, and you're done. So, it's not like it's an awful lot of work. (assuming you used standard c++ for the rest of the code) In the next version you might just be able to compile it at runtime, which increases cross-platformness!

You make it sound like its a walk in the park or something. If it was easy I wouldn't care, thing is, I'm not a pro with Linux/Mac/Unix interface in terms of programming and don't have the weeks to spend fiddling with stuff. I don't have a Mac or Linux to test it on either, so screw it.

TacticalPenguin wrote: You make a fair point that the world is your audience when distributing by other channels (but I've yet to see any love games make it that far), but ditching linux/mac because they make up only 10% (if your audience is the world then that's actually a hell of a lot of people) of your potential userbase is (in my opinion) ridiculous. If someone has to pay $100+ for an OS that rarely works as well as what they've got is just to play a game that has potential to work on their native OS, they're not going to play the game. You'd only be contributing to the only reason why many programmers have windows which is to play games because nobody bothers to make things work with linux/osx; in this case love works fine on linux/osx so I would at least put forth some decent effort to find a way to make your potential game stay that way as well.

I'm not saying Windows is better, Linux has alot more to offer than windows. Put what I think is ridiculous is not having a copy of windows on your machine. Again, its a mainstream operating system, support for other OS is always secondary.

If I make a game popular enough for people to want me to add Linux support, then I will definantly add it. Until then, Windows only.

your getting way too defensive and touchy over this entire thing

If you ever have enough time in your tight development schedule you might want to learn some basics working with gnu tools, no matter the os

then maybe you can save us the onslaught of cussing (as in your last thread) and your pissy attitude in the future + you would have learned something thats useful for pretty much every hard/software platform in existance

As I said before, no thanks.

Zorbatron wrote:I don't have a Mac or Linux to test it on either, so screw it.

I'm not saying Windows is better, Linux has alot more to offer than windows. Put what I think is ridiculous is not having a copy of windows on your machine. Again, its a mainstream operating system, support for other OS is always secondary.

If I make a game popular enough for people to want me to add Linux support, then I will definantly add it. Until then, Windows only.

>I don't have a Mac or Linux to test it on
>Linux has a lot more to offer than windows
>I think it is ridiculous to not have a copy of windows on your machine
>It's a mainstream OS
Sorry but I don't see the logic in this; you say linux has more to offer than windows (oh and it's free) but you don't have it, but it is ridiculous to not have windows (which costs $100+) just because it is mainstream. Typical windows contradiction problem I guess, little can be done about that.

TacticalPenguin wrote: Sorry but I don't see the logic in this; you say linux has more to offer than windows (oh and it's free) but you don't have it, but it is ridiculous to not have windows (which costs $100+) just because it is mainstream. Typical windows contradiction problem I guess, little can be done about that.

Is 100 dollars all the sudden alot of money? If you have a job, its definatly worth it to elimnate alot of the headache with compatibility issues.

Alot of developers I know have Linux and they tell me all the benifits it offers, thats the extent of my knowledge about Linux and it sounds great, however they also have Windows (or a Windows emulator) installed on their partition while developing. When you buy your computer, or if you assemble your own, you should always have an install of windows on it. You only need to buy one copy every 4 or so years, that's not alot of money at all.

I personally am new to developing in C/C++ and do not have Linux or have experience with it I would rather learn windows basics first (because it is mainstream, yes that is the only reason) then move to other platforms like Linux, as I said before I do know a few people that develope on Linux. But all of them have a install of windows on their partition (or a windows emulator) and tell me it is wise to do so and I agree with them.

A OS being mainstream is a very driving reason to use it. I have never physically encountered someone who said they don't have Windows OS (even Mac users have the bootcamp emulator) and most people online have Windows that I've noticed.

If you think there is a flaw in that logic please specify where exactly.

Zorbatron wrote:

bartbes wrote:And as I said, it's mostly a matter of compiler macros, and you're done. So, it's not like it's an awful lot of work. (assuming you used standard c++ for the rest of the code) In the next version you might just be able to compile it at runtime, which increases cross-platformness!

You make it sound like its a walk in the park or something. If it was easy I wouldn't care, thing is, I'm not a pro with Linux/Mac/Unix interface in terms of programming and don't have the weeks to spend fiddling with stuff. I don't have a Mac or Linux to test it on either, so screw it.

It's still a good idea to at least take in mind cross-platform capability when writing C++ code and try to be portable, even if you can't tell if it works. Just so when someone comes along and makes it work for other platforms they will have an easier time.

appleide wrote: It's still a good idea to at least take in mind cross-platform capability when writing C++ code and try to be portable, even if you can't tell if it works. Just so when someone comes along and makes it work for other platforms they will have an easier time.

I'm too noobish to even know how to make things cross-platform yet. I don't know what makes something unportable or portable. I'm writing somewhat simple extensions mostly to improve performance and add low level processing that can't be done with lua. Most of this stuff I would imagine is easily made cross-platform.

Hey, he should be able to create Windows-only games if he so desires. A community throwing rocks each time someone posts #include <windows.h> is not helping.

(Though judging from thread history, it looks like Zorbatron wanted this discussion )