On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 4:37 PM, Brian Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you really want this stuff, I would suggest you go start writing it. > Resolution changing isn't that hard really, there is plenty of source for > it, SDL has it for tons of platforms, and ctypes makes it easy to call > platform stuff from python.
If you're interested in monitor resolution switching, there's (mostly) working code in trunk/experimental/modeswitch. The code there even handles segfaults cleanly on Linux. It's not yet stable enough for inclusion into pyglet, nor am I willing to support the code that's there in its current state. > Customized texture to texture blitting is > actually even easier to write as long as it can go super slow. Well, it's impossible at the texture level. If the texture you're blitting to is also in memory (or you're willing to pull it out of graphics memory), you can use PIL or another graphics toolkit to recompose the image, and then upload it again. There's not much functionality pyglet could grow here, unless it's growing a complete image toolkit (which would be great! but infeasible in Python in my opinion). As I suggested to the OP, it's usually much faster/easier to composite on the framebuffer instead. See also the wishlist at http://code.google.com/p/pyglet/wiki/ReleaseSchedule if you haven't already; I collect requests/ideas here. Alex. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pyglet-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
