On Sun 08 May 2016 12:32:05 PM Andrew Robinson wrote: > Dev-Cpp is just a compiler, so any program written in standard C or C++ will > work with it. The Allegro5 devpak is written for C++, which is not a > problem, but the Allegro project website says that the Allegro5 libraries > are written in C, not C++, so whoever is writing these Allegro5 devpaks, is > only providing a C++ version. Sounds like someone needs to make an Allegro5 > devpak that is written for C. Is there anyone out there in the community > that is willing to do that, or is the Allegro community dying?
Dev-Cpp is actually just an IDE, it sometimes comes bundled with Mingw32 (which is a compiler), but its pretty ancient now. Whoever maintains the devpak could talk about it more, but i can't remember who that is, I don't believe it's officially supported, unlike the MSVC, and MSYS packages. I had thought there was a generic Mingw package too, not 100% certain about that mind you. > Using MSYS2 to install a Linux environment in Windows so you can use a Linux > compiler is a joke. This needs to be done right and using Dev-Cpp was the > right way to do it. If your best advice is "you are on your own", then > Allegro is a dead project or it needs to be. Allegro 4 is pretty much dead now. Allegro 5 though is not, and has working packages for MSVC, MSYS, and MingW iirc. > On 5/8/2016 at 11:38 AM, SiegeLord <siegelor...@gmail.com> wrote: > >Allegro 5 isn't compatible in any way with Allegro 4, which is why there > >are several Devpak versions of it (AGUP in particular is only for > >Allegro 4 as you've discovered). Allegro 4 isn't at all supported these > >days, so if you opt to use it, you're a bit on your own. > > > >In general, though, DevCpp hasn't really been good for a long time now. > >I would suggest you not use it. We do have a link to the Devpacks in the > >http://liballeg.org/download.html#windows section, but hopefully the > >'Unofficial' should be enough to somewhat discourage you from using them. > > > >These days the easiest way to use Allegro (5) from Windows is via MSVC, > >by following this tutorial: > >https://wiki.allegro.cc/index.php?title=Windows,_Visual_Studio_2015_and_Nug > >et_Allegro_5 > > > >There isn't an up-to-date tutorial for non-MSVC IDEs and compilers, but > >that is an option too (we provide binaries for MSYS2, which you could > >get working with Code::Blocks, if you wanted to). > > > >-SL > > > >On 05/08/2016 10:33 AM, Andrew Robinson wrote: > >> I just started using Dev-Cpp. I like the fact that it is portable but > >> the claim that by using the Devpaks are a good thing because even a > >> beginner could run projects from them is not true. People need to be > >> aware of this. > >> I tried the Allegro Devpaks but they don't work. For example, the > >> Allegro5 Devpak installs, but when I try also installing the Allegro GUI > >> Un-uglification Project Devpak, it refuses to install because it says I > >> don't have the Allegro Devpak installed. This is not a problem a > >> beginner could resolve. The internal naming conventions are the problem, > >> so the Allegro5 Devpak is internally named as Allegro5 instead of > >> Allegro. Bad move. > >> So then I uninstalled Allegro5 and installed the Allegro4.4.2 Devpak. > >> Okay, now the Allegro GUI Un-uglification Project Devpak installs, so > >> now onto the next problem. Allegro4.4.2 won't compile. Why not? Well I > >> want to compile a 32-bit program but the compile log says Allegro4.4.2 > >> isn't compatible with 64-bit. Shit! That's when I realize that none of > >> the Devpaks tell me if they are 32-bit or 64-bit, I would have to try > >> each one, one at a time, and see if any of the them is a 32-bit version. > >> But wait! There is more! Before doing that, I tried compiling my project > >> as a 64-bit project anyways, and guess what? It doesn't work! Why not? > >> At first I couldn't tell, but then I noticed that the compiler was > >> looking for a file named "lallegro-4.2.2-monolith-mt" but in the lib > >> directory installed by the Devpak, the file is named > >> "liballegro-4.2.2-monolith-mt". Do you think a beginner is going to > >> solve that problem? > >> All this tells me is that the Devpaks are a joke. They aren't documented > >> very well. They need a comment section so people can give feedback on > >> whether they really work, or whether they use the proper naming > >> convention (i.e. -- "lib" instead of "l"), and so on. Because there is > >> no feedback or control, I can't trust Devpaks. People can put anything > >> they want in it, which just makes programming all the more difficult > >> when you run into problems. And good luck if you want to upgrade your > >> project from version 4.2.2 to 4.2.3, since the libs and headers could > >> have anything in them, meaning you have no guarantee of compatibility. > >> I hope the allegro.cc instructions for compiling the Allegro > >> binaries/libraries for yourself is complete and works, because if they > >> aren't, I'm not going to be using Allegro. > >> You need to recommend that Devpaks are not to be trusted and you should > >> not use them ... unless you know how to fix the numerous problems that > >> Devpaks have presented. > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Allegro-developers mailing list > >> Allegro-developers@gna.org > >> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/allegro-developers > > _______________________________________________ > Allegro-developers mailing list > Allegro-developers@gna.org > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/allegro-developers -- Thomas Fjellstrom tho...@fjellstrom.ca _______________________________________________ Allegro-developers mailing list Allegro-developers@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/allegro-developers