Thread: turbo? clean? basic? Is C still a contender?

Care to elaborate how most of what you've just posted will work in a protected mode enviroment?

Also isn't your explanation a over-simplification of how OpenGL and DirectX work? I don't believe either of them were primarily designed to create software renderers. Even alot of the GUI (non-3d) api calls are implemented in hardware, and accessed via the driver.

Exactly. This is a HUGELY oversimplified example. For that matter,
in just "plain C", you are NOT going to end up with super graphics
engines.

Quake has assembly in it. I'd be really surprised to learn that
most (all?) 3D engines are written without any assemly. I really
doubt that is the case.

Furthermore, libraries such as OpenGL, DirectX, etc, likely have
assembly in them also.

I doubt that you can do "anything" in C. For the kernel and drivers
of the OS, as with graphics engines, I'd be VERY surprised to see
it done in "pure C" with no assembly.

While you "may" be able to do it, this is in no way saying that it
is a "GoodThing(TM)" to do so. Again, without using assembly,
your graphics, while it may be possible to do so, are NOT going to
be up to par with Quake.

Quzah.

"What do you think? Should I bother anymore, or just go away?"
Please don't go away!
This thread has earned Stars!!
I may not have the deep knowledge of C yet but I think we are all on to something in this thread...
The truth is the truth no matter where one finds it.
Alex

For what it's worth, in all the studying I've been doing to write my operating system (and a few random articles and interesting papers I've come across) I can whole-heartedly agree with Sayeh in everything that he's said...

He's right y'know. Just sit back and think about things for a bit instead of trying to tear down what he's try to _teach_ you. Absorb the knowledge he so freely attempts to give you, don't block it out.

I suggest you all read a few docs on how your computer works (in this case your video hardware) in all its aspects. That or strive to write your own O/S like me. You'll wind up learning enough low-level stuff to fill your entire harddrive and you wouldn't be making these silly arguments.

Originally posted by Sayeh
[B]Oh God, forgive them for the know _nothing_...

I could swear, I could be flabbergasted, I could just positively throw my hands up in the air and scream at your _IGORANCE_. Quzah I am positively _ashamed_ at your comment. Un_believable_.

What do you people think C code becomes? What do you think ANY COMPUTER LANGUAGE IS CONVERTED TO, FOR THAT MATTER.... ASSEMBLY LANGUAGE! That is what your compiler is for, for crying outload. Do you think your computer runs 'C' code? sheesh.

Gee, ya think? Of course it BECOMES assembly. There is a HUGE difference between "programming in C" and "programming in assembly". If YOU don't know the difference, then yes, you damn sure should be ashamed.

'C' is nothing more than a language, like english or spanish that you use to talk to your COMPILER. Not the computer.

I stated my pseudocode example was not written for performance. It was written as an example to give people an idea how it's done. That's why virtually none of you have done it, because you've never even gotten _this_ far.

And as such, you missed my entire point:

Writing a graphics engine in C is far different than writing one in assembly. There is a REASON they write parts of the code in C and write parts in ASM. If there was NO DIFFERENCE do you think they would bother doing it? Hell no they wouldn't.

Of course, the real thing would use custom assembler because it's tighter than what the compiler would generate, but most people on this board don't know assembler, and if you really wanted to see it that way, it would have taken a _lot_ longer to provide. You ever wonder why C has so few "built-in" functions and commands-- it's just the basics-- so it CAN BE PORTABLE. That's all you need to write the rest. What more do you need?

Thank you for making my point. Like I said: WRITING A GRAPHICS ENGINE IN C IS NOT THE SAME AS WRITING IT IN ASM.

Quzah, again, I'm so shocked with your statement I would think somebody else wrote it... just, almost no words. You are _most certainly_ smarter than that.

So what exactly was the horrible point of my post? Stating that your graphics engine isn't the same if you write it in C as in ASM? Again, if that were incorrect, why on earth would they even bother with ASM? Oh, that's right, I must have no clue...

Quzah.

Let's see if I understand something:
- C could write a graphics program.
- There are no standardized graphics libraries in "clean" C.
- There are third party graphics libraries.
- If I write code using these libraries (or, even make that african gun) there is no guarantee that my executable will run on any given, specific computer????

Just to answer your second point here regarding a standardised graphics library. Your best bet is OpenGL. The libraries have a standard interface across many different platforms. It works in straight C - although of course you are calling the OpenGL library and not C functions. The OpenGL library itself is written primarily in C, but I believe that the implementation is hardware/OS specific. For example, Microsoft provide their own implentation under windows.

If you are not looking for high performance, you could use the GLUT libraries. It is essentially an OpenGL wrapper that goes a long way to creating an OS independant library. For example the call to create a window is exactly the same under Windows as it is under Solaris or Linux, GLUT takes care of the behind the scenes work.

As far as game development goes, most games are written in C with either DirectX or OpenGL being the most common graphics API. It used to be that some developers would claim that C++ doesn't have the performance, but from the Gaming press I can see that the use of C++ is growing all the time - but I have not seen a game programming job todate that does not require C as the main skill.

If you can produce some clearly portable C code to write a game/GUI app that doesn't call an API (and doesn't resort to "well you can write your own o/s"), then I'll happily eat my words.

Your dead right. You can't - you need to use an API if you want to get performance and portability. OpenGL is the only truly portable API that is supported directly in hardware on most standard video cards which is why ID software use it.

You can, just so long as you retrieve the address space you should write to from your OS. Ok, ok, so no code is completely portable. You just have to recompile for different platforms.

I debated whether or not to respond to that scathing post of yours Sayeh. In the end, my being insulted won out over objectivity.

>Because you just can't seem to understand it, you try to tear it down,
>instead of thinking about it and correlating what you learn.
>Very frustrating.
It's also very frustrating how you simply assume that we aren't trying to understand at all. I'll describe my posts because those are the only ones I'm sure of. I believe I answered a question to the best of my knowledge and as usual expected someone to correct me if I was wrong. When I found out that I apparently was wrong, I requested more information so that I could learn. Then you show up saying that we're so ignorant and why can't we understand something that you've worked with most of your life? I'm sorry, you may be approaching 70, but common courtesy doesn't have an age limit.

Could you tell me what is the difference between your last post and someone who comes onto these boards bashing novices just because of their lack of experience? I'm sorry If I'm not 50 years older and started working with computers at the time of the 4004 chip. So I ask you, please respect the fact that we are not as knowledgeable as you, but we are trying.

-Prelude

>>and why can't we understand something that you've worked with most of your life?

Hear hear...I was neglecting the apparent bashings of sayeh in my previous posts in order to try and keep things a bit more on-topic, but I do agree with that.

First:
Thanks to foniks munkee for the tip on OpenGL
Second:
I've been on many boards in my time and I've seen flame wars and huge tidal waves of disrespect; also, some of the best and most educational threads ever. This one, however, is some weird combination of a war about to happen and a high-level interchange of stimulating ideas. (I am a newbie to C but not to life and the psychology of this thread is fascinating)
Third:
C must be something _real special_ because I really like this board and its people, in spite of the obvious character flaws in this thread. (are mine showing?)......
Alex

>>C must be something _real special_

It really is...

>>because I really like this board and its people

>>in spite of the obvious character flaws in this thread. (are mine showing?)......

pobody's nerfect Plus, normal people would make for rather boring discussion, dontcha think? And yes, I'd have to say yours would be that you're a smartass