Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

SFML 2.0 vs SDL 1.3

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-21 0:01

Both are undergoing development
Both support hardware accelerated 2D out of the box
Both are licensed under the zlib license -- that's right, you are now free to statically link SDL to your programs

SFML is mostly supported by one developer, a much smaller team than the one behind SDL
SFML is only aimed at Windows/Linux/OSX for the moment, while SDL supports a much wider range of platforms
SFML 2.0 is pretty unstable at the moment, with the lead developer stating that he's prepared to completely break parts of the API prior to the 2.0 release
SDL 1.3 is probably pretty unstable as well
SFML has a much more friendly API than SDL, in my experience, although this is limited to usage of 1.2

Given my limited knowledge of SDL 1.3, I'm not sure which is the better library to side with. I originally jumped ship from SDL to SFML because of its friendlier API and hardware accelerated 2D graphics, but if SDL 1.3 is going to feature similar hardware acceleration along with a brisker, more reliable pace of development, my inclined to side with it. Can /prog/ convince me to pick a camp?

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-21 12:43

>>32
Is memory use, size of program, speed of execution one of "pointless constraints"?
Depends on the actual values. For instance, the difference between 20mb and 2mb used by an in-memory image of library on an 4Gb machine, for a 3d graphics application, is irrelevant, the 2mb memory consumption constraint is artificial, and spending any effort whatsoever to fit the library in the constrained space is pointless.

Prove me wrong.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List