LÖVE

love.graphics.direct3d.lame = true

Such a module would massively decrease portability. However, a DirectX port would be quite useful.

If I had a vote, I'd vote against losing even 1 minute on DX.

Luiji wrote:Such a module would massively decrease portability.

Ehm, no, it won't be a replacement, it will be an alternative.

Luiji wrote: However, a DirectX port would be quite useful.

What? Direct3D is the graphics part of DirectX, so I'm not sure what it is you're saying.

I meant Direct3D. The usefulness of the port would be that certain Direct3D works better on certain hardware (because such certain hardware is lame).

OpenGL > DirectAnything

As is my general opinion.

I've used older hardware where OpenGL runs like crap and Direct3D runs perfectly. It's a problem with the hardware companies, but since OpenGL is now almost globally supported, it actually might just be a waste of time to include any Direct3D code.

I don't see much need for any kind of Dx support. Though I guess you would probably need it for a xbox version of löve, and there are some old graphics cards that are terrible at openGL.

Anyways, shaders are very cool, but if they become part of löve they definitely need some sort of easy way to configure them, a common set as Elvashi suggested would cover most needs, but I think ideally something akin to how mapPixel works but with a FBO would be more lövely. (even if its a bit slow)

An XBOX version of LOVE would need DirectX, yes, but that is such an old system we may not want to spend time supporting it until someone volunteers, in which case they'll implement DirectX, too. Same goes for really old graphics hardware.

An XBOX 360 version would not work with ANY of the dependencies and probably wouldn't properly work with the current C++, since XBOX 360 requires you to write programs in .NET and I'm pretty sure Visual C++ can't perfectly compile normal C++ programs.

Luiji wrote:I'm pretty sure Visual C++ can't perfectly compile normal C++ programs.

How do you think the windows builds are made?

With MinGW. I guess I was wrong there, but what I meant was Visual C++ .NET.