Re: [pygame] Problem with pygame.image.load() and a gzip.open() stream
Lenard Lindstrom wrote: Paul Broadhead wrote: Marius Gedminas wrote: Why do you want a gzipped bmp file rather than a png? My application is a utility for a game, the game currently uses straight bmp files but will supply them gzipped in the future. The file type is out of my control. Which file type is out of your control, the .bmp image format or the gzip compression. I tried loading an image from a gzip.GzipFile object, a cStringIO.StringIO object and a bz2.BZ2File object. Only the GzipFile object failed. I could find only one significant difference between a GzipFile and the other two, GzipFile is a classic class while the other two are new-style classes (extension types). This leaves four possibilities: 1) Use bz2 compression. 2) Read the gzip file into a string and use StringIO to pass the string to pygame.image.load(). 3) Create a new-style wrapper class for gzip.GzipFile 4) Create your own new-style version of GzipFile This wrapper class works for option (3): class MyFile(object): def __init__(self, f): self.f = f def read(self, n): return self.f.read(n) def seek(self, offset, whence=0): self.f.seek(offset, whence) def tell(self): return self.f.tell() where f is any file-like object. Further testing shows the problem is specific to GzipFile. It has nothing to do with classic classes. So option (3) is worthless. -- Lenard Lindstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
Troll. On 2/15/07, Jer Juke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah, you heard me. Normally I wouldn't feel any need to pick out some random library and state how awful I think it is. But this is not "some random library". It is the "standard" game library for a most beautiful language known far and wide for it's power and easy of use, both when it comes to the language itself and it's libraries. The fact that Python is generally blessed with truly magnificent libraries everywhere is what makes Pygame stand so out. Pygame is in absolutely no way magnificent or even slightly pythonic. It's just a goddamn SDL wrapper. Using the name Pygame for this abhorrent library is an atrocity. It should be called PySDL, and make it more obvious to the python community that Pygame is yet to be properly created. But that's not the worst part. PySDL (what you all call Pygame) is actually a very useful library. It does what it does QUITE WELL! It's perfect for creating higher level libraries. BUT PYGAME DOESN'T EVEN MANAGE TO BE PYGAME. Yes, I am talking about the fact that even half a year after the official Python 2.5 came out, Pygame still does not EXIST FOR THIS PLATFORM. I can sympathize with taking a month to compile some new binaries. Developers do after all have other things to do. Even a couple of months is acceptable. But SERIOUSLY, a team of people that maintain THE STANDARD F*CKING GAME PACKAGE USED BY A GAZILLION OTHER PYTHON PROJECTS but can't make one required update in the time-span of ONE HALF YEAR is a disgrace. No one cares if you are in the process of adding all sorts of awesome new crap to Pygame. Do you guys even have any idea how many python modules use Pygame for one reason or another? Until you actually have Pygame 1.8, COMPILE A GODDAMN 2.5 VERSION FOR THE OLD PYGAME!! How about some honesty? How about replacing "we needed an extra few weeks" on the pygame site with "we are not able to adequately maintain this package. new maintainers needed"? I know whoever maintains pygame aren't "paid". They don't "owe" anyone anything. But in my opinion, these people are a disgrace and a detriment to python game development efforts on the whole. Need Mail bonding? Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
Re: [pygame] Problem with pygame.image.load() and a gzip.open() stream
Paul Broadhead wrote: Marius Gedminas wrote: Why do you want a gzipped bmp file rather than a png? My application is a utility for a game, the game currently uses straight bmp files but will supply them gzipped in the future. The file type is out of my control. Which file type is out of your control, the .bmp image format or the gzip compression. I tried loading an image from a gzip.GzipFile object, a cStringIO.StringIO object and a bz2.BZ2File object. Only the GzipFile object failed. I could find only one significant difference between a GzipFile and the other two, GzipFile is a classic class while the other two are new-style classes (extension types). This leaves four possibilities: 1) Use bz2 compression. 2) Read the gzip file into a string and use StringIO to pass the string to pygame.image.load(). 3) Create a new-style wrapper class for gzip.GzipFile 4) Create your own new-style version of GzipFile This wrapper class works for option (3): class MyFile(object): def __init__(self, f): self.f = f def read(self, n): return self.f.read(n) def seek(self, offset, whence=0): self.f.seek(offset, whence) def tell(self): return self.f.tell() where f is any file-like object. -- Lenard Lindstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
Your two main issues seem to be that pygame isn't pythonic enough, and that no one has compiled a python 2.5 version for you. I'm not quite sure what you mean by not pythonic enough, I wouldn't mind if some of the functions in some of the modules, for instance transform, were merged with Surface objects. If you have some specific suggestions the developers would probably like to hear them. As for not having a 2.5 version available for you, why not compile it yourself? If you can't, that suggests you don't know what compiling would entail, and in that case you really don't have enough information to complain about how long it is taking for an official binary to come out. Maybe there are some specific problems with 2.5 and pygame we aren't aware of... but you should ask this list before overreacting and calling the whole project a disgrace.
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
die On 2/15/07, Jer Juke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah, you heard me. Normally I wouldn't feel any need to pick out some random library and state how awful I think it is. But this is not "some random library". It is the "standard" game library for a most beautiful language known far and wide for it's power and easy of use, both when it comes to the language itself and it's libraries. The fact that Python is generally blessed with truly magnificent libraries everywhere is what makes Pygame stand so out. Pygame is in absolutely no way magnificent or even slightly pythonic. It's just a goddamn SDL wrapper. Using the name Pygame for this abhorrent library is an atrocity. It should be called PySDL, and make it more obvious to the python community that Pygame is yet to be properly created. But that's not the worst part. PySDL (what you all call Pygame) is actually a very useful library. It does what it does QUITE WELL! It's perfect for creating higher level libraries. BUT PYGAME DOESN'T EVEN MANAGE TO BE PYGAME. Yes, I am talking about the fact that even half a year after the official Python 2.5 came out, Pygame still does not EXIST FOR THIS PLATFORM. I can sympathize with taking a month to compile some new binaries. Developers do after all have other things to do. Even a couple of months is acceptable. But SERIOUSLY, a team of people that maintain THE STANDARD F*CKING GAME PACKAGE USED BY A GAZILLION OTHER PYTHON PROJECTS but can't make one required update in the time-span of ONE HALF YEAR is a disgrace. No one cares if you are in the process of adding all sorts of awesome new crap to Pygame. Do you guys even have any idea how many python modules use Pygame for one reason or another? Until you actually have Pygame 1.8, COMPILE A GODDAMN 2.5 VERSION FOR THE OLD PYGAME!! How about some honesty? How about replacing "we needed an extra few weeks" on the pygame site with "we are not able to adequately maintain this package. new maintainers needed"? I know whoever maintains pygame aren't "paid". They don't "owe" anyone anything. But in my opinion, these people are a disgrace and a detriment to python game development efforts on the whole. Need Mail bonding? Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
Re: [pygame] Problem with pygame.image.load() and a gzip.open() stream
Marius Gedminas wrote: > Why do you want a gzipped bmp file rather than a png? My application is a utility for a game, the game currently uses straight bmp files but will supply them gzipped in the future. The file type is out of my control. Thanks anyway, Paul
Re: [pygame] Problem with pygame.image.load() and a gzip.open() stream
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 09:54:36PM +, Paul Broadhead wrote:
> I have a bmp image file that loads fine with:
>
> fid = open('test.bmp','rb')
> theimg = pygame.image.load(fid)
> fid.close()
>
> but if I gzip the image using "gzip test.bmp" then try
>
> fid = gzip.open('test.bmp.gz','rb')
> theimg = pygame.image.load(fid)
> fid.close()
>
> I get an error:
> theimg = pygame.image.load(fid)
> pygame.error: File is not a Windows BMP file
My guess would be that pygame tries to seek around the file, but cannot
do so. (It may be a completely wrong guess, because I would expect an
exception rather than this sort of error.)
Why do you want a gzipped bmp file rather than a png?
Marius Gedminas
--
He who sacrifices functionality for ease of use
Loses both and deserves neither
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
[pygame] Problem with pygame.image.load() and a gzip.open() stream
I have a bmp image file that loads fine with:
fid = open('test.bmp','rb')
theimg = pygame.image.load(fid)
fid.close()
"file test.bmp" yields the expected
test.bmp: PC bitmap data, Windows 3.x format, 512 x 512 x 8
but if I gzip the image using "gzip test.bmp" then try
fid = gzip.open('test.bmp.gz','rb')
theimg = pygame.image.load(fid)
fid.close()
I get an error:
theimg = pygame.image.load(fid)
pygame.error: File is not a Windows BMP file
As intended, I can read the gzip.open() stream file as if it was not
compressed with standard file IO stuff but the pygame call appears to
know the difference. Am I doing something wrong or is this a problem
with image.load()?
Thanks,
Paul
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
On 2/15/07, Rikard Bosnjakovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 2/15/07, Bob Ippolito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think it would've taken a lot less time to compile some version (any > version) of pygame for Python 2.5 than to write this message. I'd beg to differ. Pygame 1.7 had a lot of dependencies which was a real pain in the backside to compile. Pango and Cairo pops up to mind, but these are only a few. I think I struggled for about 5 straight hours before throwing the Gnome/GTK/whatever-deps out and finally fallbacked to an earlier binary version. I'm pretty sure that neither Pango or Cairo are direct dependencies of pygame. The majority of the libraries you need are the SDL ones, which you can get precompiled on every platform that pygame supports. On top of those you need couple other libraries like libpng, but you can get those precompiled as well. I could imagine that it would be a royal pain in the ass if you were compiling EVERYTHING from scratch on a *nix platform... but don't do that. -bob
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
On 2/15/07, Kamilche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jer Juke wrote: > Yeah, you heard me > (snip) > ...these people are a disgrace and a detriment to > python game development efforts on the whole. > You're not impressing anybody with your vicious attack on people who maintain and support Pygame. You're doing them a great disservice, and ensuring YOU will never receive any support from people who read this mailing list. --Kamilche Agreed. If a binary is not available, compile it, or ask around to see if anybody had a compiled version. The pygame devels have been doing a great job and without them, there wouldn't be any version of pygame. Be thankful for what you have, and be patient, or if you want to see the new version come out earlier, feel free to help them out, I'm sure they can always use help. Also, as there is the saying, You attract more flies with honey, not with vinegar. Think about it. -spot
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
Jer Juke wrote: Yeah, you heard me > (snip) ...these people are a disgrace and a detriment to > python game development efforts on the whole. You're not impressing anybody with your vicious attack on people who maintain and support Pygame. You're doing them a great disservice, and ensuring YOU will never receive any support from people who read this mailing list. --Kamilche
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
FWIW, I've compiled pygame-1.7.1 (as well as Numeric-24.2 for surfarray) for Python2.5-win32 and would be happy to contribute the installer to the pygame site if there's need. I also tried compiling pygame-1.8 a couple of weeks back, but it seemed to have a lot of new dependencies for headers and libs that I couldn't find outright. -- Sami Hangaslammi
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
On 2/15/07, Bob Ippolito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think it would've taken a lot less time to compile some version (any version) of pygame for Python 2.5 than to write this message. I'd beg to differ. Pygame 1.7 had a lot of dependencies which was a real pain in the backside to compile. Pango and Cairo pops up to mind, but these are only a few. I think I struggled for about 5 straight hours before throwing the Gnome/GTK/whatever-deps out and finally fallbacked to an earlier binary version. -- - Rikard.
Re: [pygame] alpha channel in font-rendered Surfaces
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 07:40:13AM -0600, Brendan Speer wrote: > On 2/15/07, Goran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I have a problem when trying to fade-in a text. > > > >Using the alpha-channel when blitting in an image works fine, but not a > >surface generated by Font.render(). > > Surface.convert_alpha creates per-pixel alpha values. > > >From the Surface.set_alpha help: 'This value is different than the per > >pixel > Surface alpha. If the Surface format contains per pixel alphas, then this > alpha value will be ignored. If the Surface contains per pixel alphas, > setting the alpha value to None will disable the per pixel transparency.' > > In order to do what you're asking, you need to look at Sufarray. and > manipulate each per-pixel alpha individually, I do that in PySpaceWar with Numeric: http://mg.pov.lt/pyspacewar/trac/browser/trunk/src/pyspacewar/ui.py?rev=260#L817 (The code is GPLed.) > or you can use convert() > instead of convert_alpha() (I think...) There's a fallback in PySpaceWar that does this when Numeric is not installed. Marius Gedminas -- 11. Are you at least tracking the number of users of retchmail? As far as I know, retchmail has exactly three users. -- http://open.nit.ca/wiki/index.php?page=RetchMail signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [pygame] alpha channel in font-rendered Surfaces
Surface.convert_alpha creates per-pixel alpha values.
From the Surface.set_alpha help: 'This value is different than the per pixel
Surface alpha. If the Surface format contains per pixel alphas, then this
alpha value will be ignored. If the Surface contains per pixel alphas,
setting the alpha value to None will disable the per pixel transparency.'
In order to do what you're asking, you need to look at Sufarray. and
manipulate each per-pixel alpha individually, or you can use convert()
instead of convert_alpha() (I think...)
On 2/15/07, Goran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I have a problem when trying to fade-in a text.
Using the alpha-channel when blitting in an image works fine, but not a
surface generated by Font.render().
Below is a complete example, (using two external files test.png and
freesansbold.ttf, replace with your own image and font).
I am new to pygame, so please bear with me.
Yours,
Goran
-
import pygame
pygame.init()
screensize = screenwidth, screenheight = 800, 600
# create a pygame "Surface" to draw on
screen = pygame.display.set_mode(screensize) # in window
screen.fill( (255,255,255) )
pygame.display.update()
pygame.time.wait(1000)
testimage = pygame.image.load("test.png").convert()
pygame.font.init()
font = pygame.font.Font('freesansbold.ttf',40)
fontimage = font.render('TESTIMAGE',1,(0,0,0));
testimage2 = fontimage.convert_alpha()
alphaVector = range(0,255,10)
for alpha in alphaVector:
testimage2.set_alpha( alpha )
screen.blit( testimage2, (0,0))
pygame.display.update()
pygame.time.wait(50)
print alpha
pygame.quit()
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
Luke Paireepinart wrote: altern wrote: Bob Ippolito wrote: On 2/15/07, Jer Juke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah, you heard me. Normally I wouldn't feel any need to pick out some random library and state how awful I think it is. But this is not "some random library". It is the "standard" game library for a most beautiful language known far and wide for it's power and easy of use, both when it comes to the language itself and it's libraries. The fact that Python is generally blessed with truly magnificent libraries everywhere is what makes Pygame stand so out. Pygame is in absolutely no way magnificent or even slightly pythonic. It's just a goddamn SDL wrapper. Using the name Pygame for this abhorrent library is an atrocity. It should be called PySDL, and make it more obvious to the python community that Pygame is yet to be properly created. But that's not the worst part. PySDL (what you all call Pygame) is actually a very useful library. It does what it does QUITE WELL! It's perfect for creating higher level libraries. BUT PYGAME DOESN'T EVEN MANAGE TO BE PYGAME. Yes, I am talking about the fact that even half a year after the official Python 2.5 came out, Pygame still does not EXIST FOR THIS PLATFORM. I can sympathize with taking a month to compile some new binaries. Developers do after all have other things to do. Even a couple of months is acceptable. But SERIOUSLY, a team of people that maintain THE STANDARD F*CKING GAME PACKAGE USED BY A GAZILLION OTHER PYTHON PROJECTS but can't make one required update in the time-span of ONE HALF YEAR is a disgrace. No one cares if you are in the process of adding all sorts of awesome new crap to Pygame. Do you guys even have any idea how many python modules use Pygame for one reason or another? Until you actually have Pygame 1.8, COMPILE A GODDAMN 2.5 VERSION FOR THE OLD PYGAME!! How about some honesty? How about replacing "we needed an extra few weeks" on the pygame site with "we are not able to adequately maintain this package. new maintainers needed"? I know whoever maintains pygame aren't "paid". They don't "owe" anyone anything. But in my opinion, these people are a disgrace and a detriment to python game development efforts on the whole. I think it would've taken a lot less time to compile some version (any version) of pygame for Python 2.5 than to write this message. You could've instead wrote a much shorter message about the fact that you compiled some version of pygame for python 2.5 on the platform you care about and included a link to where it could be obtained from. Would've been a lot more productive than a l*ng f*ck*ng r*nt about... not much. so why nobody did it yet? He is talking about windows and windows users dont usually compile much, it would be very useful for them to have a 2.5 installer. I am not running 2.5 on my windows machine yet otherwise i would do it myself. enrike I believe you'd also need .NET 2003 or something. Nobody's done it yet for 1.8 because it's not a finalized version. No one's done it for 1.7 because everyone's expecting 1.8 to come out. Honestly why go through the trouble unless you actually have a need for some of the new functionality they added in 1.8? (although I guess it would be nice to use 2.5 with pygame. I don't know. I just use 2.4 and pygame 1.7.1 cause I don't want to go through the trouble to update until they have a final release of 1.8.) what about pygame 1.7.1 windows installer for python 2.5? i bet this is what he means. enrike
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
altern wrote: Bob Ippolito wrote: On 2/15/07, Jer Juke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah, you heard me. Normally I wouldn't feel any need to pick out some random library and state how awful I think it is. But this is not "some random library". It is the "standard" game library for a most beautiful language known far and wide for it's power and easy of use, both when it comes to the language itself and it's libraries. The fact that Python is generally blessed with truly magnificent libraries everywhere is what makes Pygame stand so out. Pygame is in absolutely no way magnificent or even slightly pythonic. It's just a goddamn SDL wrapper. Using the name Pygame for this abhorrent library is an atrocity. It should be called PySDL, and make it more obvious to the python community that Pygame is yet to be properly created. But that's not the worst part. PySDL (what you all call Pygame) is actually a very useful library. It does what it does QUITE WELL! It's perfect for creating higher level libraries. BUT PYGAME DOESN'T EVEN MANAGE TO BE PYGAME. Yes, I am talking about the fact that even half a year after the official Python 2.5 came out, Pygame still does not EXIST FOR THIS PLATFORM. I can sympathize with taking a month to compile some new binaries. Developers do after all have other things to do. Even a couple of months is acceptable. But SERIOUSLY, a team of people that maintain THE STANDARD F*CKING GAME PACKAGE USED BY A GAZILLION OTHER PYTHON PROJECTS but can't make one required update in the time-span of ONE HALF YEAR is a disgrace. No one cares if you are in the process of adding all sorts of awesome new crap to Pygame. Do you guys even have any idea how many python modules use Pygame for one reason or another? Until you actually have Pygame 1.8, COMPILE A GODDAMN 2.5 VERSION FOR THE OLD PYGAME!! How about some honesty? How about replacing "we needed an extra few weeks" on the pygame site with "we are not able to adequately maintain this package. new maintainers needed"? I know whoever maintains pygame aren't "paid". They don't "owe" anyone anything. But in my opinion, these people are a disgrace and a detriment to python game development efforts on the whole. I think it would've taken a lot less time to compile some version (any version) of pygame for Python 2.5 than to write this message. You could've instead wrote a much shorter message about the fact that you compiled some version of pygame for python 2.5 on the platform you care about and included a link to where it could be obtained from. Would've been a lot more productive than a l*ng f*ck*ng r*nt about... not much. so why nobody did it yet? He is talking about windows and windows users dont usually compile much, it would be very useful for them to have a 2.5 installer. I am not running 2.5 on my windows machine yet otherwise i would do it myself. enrike I believe you'd also need .NET 2003 or something. Nobody's done it yet for 1.8 because it's not a finalized version. No one's done it for 1.7 because everyone's expecting 1.8 to come out. Honestly why go through the trouble unless you actually have a need for some of the new functionality they added in 1.8? (although I guess it would be nice to use 2.5 with pygame. I don't know. I just use 2.4 and pygame 1.7.1 cause I don't want to go through the trouble to update until they have a final release of 1.8.)
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
Bob Ippolito wrote: On 2/15/07, Jer Juke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah, you heard me. Normally I wouldn't feel any need to pick out some random library and state how awful I think it is. But this is not "some random library". It is the "standard" game library for a most beautiful language known far and wide for it's power and easy of use, both when it comes to the language itself and it's libraries. The fact that Python is generally blessed with truly magnificent libraries everywhere is what makes Pygame stand so out. Pygame is in absolutely no way magnificent or even slightly pythonic. It's just a goddamn SDL wrapper. Using the name Pygame for this abhorrent library is an atrocity. It should be called PySDL, and make it more obvious to the python community that Pygame is yet to be properly created. But that's not the worst part. PySDL (what you all call Pygame) is actually a very useful library. It does what it does QUITE WELL! It's perfect for creating higher level libraries. BUT PYGAME DOESN'T EVEN MANAGE TO BE PYGAME. Yes, I am talking about the fact that even half a year after the official Python 2.5 came out, Pygame still does not EXIST FOR THIS PLATFORM. I can sympathize with taking a month to compile some new binaries. Developers do after all have other things to do. Even a couple of months is acceptable. But SERIOUSLY, a team of people that maintain THE STANDARD F*CKING GAME PACKAGE USED BY A GAZILLION OTHER PYTHON PROJECTS but can't make one required update in the time-span of ONE HALF YEAR is a disgrace. No one cares if you are in the process of adding all sorts of awesome new crap to Pygame. Do you guys even have any idea how many python modules use Pygame for one reason or another? Until you actually have Pygame 1.8, COMPILE A GODDAMN 2.5 VERSION FOR THE OLD PYGAME!! How about some honesty? How about replacing "we needed an extra few weeks" on the pygame site with "we are not able to adequately maintain this package. new maintainers needed"? I know whoever maintains pygame aren't "paid". They don't "owe" anyone anything. But in my opinion, these people are a disgrace and a detriment to python game development efforts on the whole. I think it would've taken a lot less time to compile some version (any version) of pygame for Python 2.5 than to write this message. You could've instead wrote a much shorter message about the fact that you compiled some version of pygame for python 2.5 on the platform you care about and included a link to where it could be obtained from. Would've been a lot more productive than a l*ng f*ck*ng r*nt about... not much. so why nobody did it yet? He is talking about windows and windows users dont usually compile much, it would be very useful for them to have a 2.5 installer. I am not running 2.5 on my windows machine yet otherwise i would do it myself. enrike
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
Jer Juke wrote: Yeah, you heard me. Normally I wouldn't feel any need to pick out some random library and state how awful I think it is. But this is not "some random library". It is the "standard" game library for a most beautiful language known far and wide for it's power and easy of use, both when it comes to the language itself and it's libraries. The fact that Python is generally blessed with truly magnificent libraries everywhere is what makes Pygame stand so out. Pygame is in absolutely no way magnificent or even slightly pythonic. It's just a goddamn SDL wrapper. And WxPython is just a goddamn WxWindows wrapper... same with TkInter, same with pyGTK, pyKDE, PyQt, etc. And that's just gui frameworks. The long and short of it is: GUI toolkits need to be as fast as possible, because they just display data that is calculated elsewhere, and you want as much cpu power as possible to be in the calculations. Therefore, any serious one would be a python binding to a C++ module. it's not a disadvantage that it's a wrapper. If it were written in pure python it would be much more complicated, not to mention all of the 'reinventing the wheel' that would go on. SDL is a good library for low-level access. Using the name Pygame for this abhorrent library is an atrocity. It should be called PySDL, and make it more obvious to the python community that Pygame is yet to be properly created. Ah, yes, let's rename it back to what it was originally named. Brilliant solution. Pygame is the continuation of pySDL, with extra features that make it not an exact wrapper of SDL, so the name pySDL is less accurate. But that's not the worst part. PySDL (what you all call Pygame) is actually a very useful library. It does what it does QUITE WELL! It's perfect for creating higher level libraries. BUT PYGAME DOESN'T EVEN MANAGE TO BE PYGAME. Yes, I am talking about the fact that even half a year after the official Python 2.5 came out, Pygame still does not EXIST FOR THIS PLATFORM. Binary installs are very different than a lack of support. The newest version of pygame works on YOUR PLATFORM almost definitely, although i can't be sure because I don't know WHAT PLATFORM you have. Like Bob says, STFU and go compile it yourself if you want it so badly. Same with lots of other open source projects, when pygame's not a development version it will have binaries. But that's provided as a service to you; it's not requisite from the authors' point of view. I can sympathize with taking a month to compile some new binaries. Developers do after all have other things to do. Even a couple of months is acceptable. But SERIOUSLY, a team of people that maintain THE STANDARD F*CKING GAME PACKAGE USED BY A GAZILLION OTHER PYTHON PROJECTS but can't make one required update in the time-span of ONE HALF YEAR is a disgrace. And which developers are we talking about that need binaries in order to use pygame? Any hands? No? hmm, curious. So if you're too inept to make the source work for you, use the 1.7.1 version with python 2.4. It's forward compatible, so don't worry. Anyone who manages to install 1.8 will be able to run your programs. No one cares if you are in the process of adding all sorts of awesome new crap to Pygame. Do you guys even have any idea how many python modules use Pygame for one reason or another? Until you actually have Pygame 1.8, COMPILE A GODDAMN 2.5 VERSION FOR THE OLD PYGAME!! How about some honesty? How about replacing "we needed an extra few weeks" on the pygame site with "we are not able to adequately maintain this package. new maintainers needed"? ... I know whoever maintains pygame aren't "paid". They don't "owe" anyone anything. But in my opinion, these people are a disgrace and a detriment to python game development efforts on the whole. I can hardly imagine what terrible experience must've befallen you to make you this adamant about the issue. Did you try to compile it but you couldn't get it to work? Cry more, noob. Your comments are not productive. You lose 5 internets. To be completely honest, I agree with you, that it'd be nice if someone took the time to compile the binaries. But your complete and utter lack of etiquette, tact, or common sense is staggering. Did you expect everyone to rally behind you and have a big renaming and compiling effort initiated? Our perception of your intelligence and our opinion of the merit of your argument increase in direct proportion to how well you can hide the fact that you're irritated, and how well you perform that basic, everyday task of not placing expletives throughout your writing or speech. The inverse is also true. Therefore, in both categories, your score is lackluster. hope that helps, -Luke
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
Jer Juke wrote: Yeah, you heard me. Normally I wouldn't feel any need to pick out some random library and state how awful I think it is. But this is not "some random library". It is the "standard" game library for a most beautiful language known far and wide for it's power and easy of use, both when it comes to the language itself and it's libraries. The fact that Python is generally blessed with truly magnificent libraries everywhere is what makes Pygame stand so out. Pygame is in absolutely no way magnificent or even slightly pythonic. It's just a goddamn SDL wrapper. Using the name Pygame for this abhorrent library is an atrocity. It should be called PySDL, and make it more obvious to the python community that Pygame is yet to be properly created. i always thought pySDL would be the best name, and i guess most people would think the same, but check this out http://pysdl.sourceforge.net i guess thats the main reason for choosing pygame over pySDL as name. I also think it would be really useful for the developers if you point the reasons why 'this abhorrent library is an atrocity' so that they can consider fixing/improving those areas of the library. Just try to be more constructive. But that's not the worst part. PySDL (what you all call Pygame) is actually a very useful library. It does what it does QUITE WELL! It's perfect for creating higher level libraries. BUT PYGAME DOESN'T EVEN MANAGE TO BE PYGAME. Yes, I am talking about the fact that even half a year after the official Python 2.5 came out, Pygame still does not EXIST FOR THIS PLATFORM. I can sympathize with taking a month to compile some new binaries. Developers do after all have other things to do. Even a couple of months is acceptable. But SERIOUSLY, a team of people that maintain THE STANDARD F*CKING GAME PACKAGE USED BY A GAZILLION OTHER PYTHON PROJECTS but can't make one required update in the time-span of ONE HALF YEAR is a disgrace. No one cares if you are in the process of adding all sorts of awesome new crap to Pygame. Do you guys even have any idea how many python modules use Pygame for one reason or another? Until you actually have Pygame 1.8, COMPILE A GODDAMN 2.5 VERSION FOR THE OLD PYGAME!! How about some honesty? How about replacing "we needed an extra few weeks" on the pygame site with "we are not able to adequately maintain this package. new maintainers needed"? I know whoever maintains pygame aren't "paid". They don't "owe" anyone anything. But in my opinion, these people are a disgrace and a detriment to python game development efforts on the whole. try to do it yourself or ask politely for someone to do it. it is usually more effective. Are you talking about windows? enrike
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Clearly, the python community needs a much superior game library, and clearly you must be capable of developing such a library or you probably would not have written that message. We look forward to seeing your new library, which is certain to become the new standard for game development in python once everyone realizes how awesome it is. It is most unfortunate that the name "PyGame" has been taken, but I'm sure you are a very creative person capable of coming up with an even better name. - Ken Seehart Jer Juke wrote: Yeah, you heard me. Normally I wouldn't feel any need to pick out some random library and state how awful I think it is. But this is not "some random library". It is the "standard" game library for a most beautiful language known far and wide for it's power and easy of use, both when it comes to the language itself and it's libraries. The fact that Python is generally blessed with truly magnificent libraries everywhere is what makes Pygame stand so out. Pygame is in absolutely no way magnificent or even slightly pythonic. It's just a goddamn SDL wrapper. Using the name Pygame for this abhorrent library is an atrocity. It should be called PySDL, and make it more obvious to the python community that Pygame is yet to be properly created. But that's not the worst part. PySDL (what you all call Pygame) is actually a very useful library. It does what it does QUITE WELL! It's perfect for creating higher level libraries. BUT PYGAME DOESN'T EVEN MANAGE TO BE PYGAME. Yes, I am talking about the fact that even half a year after the official Python 2.5 came out, Pygame still does not EXIST FOR THIS PLATFORM. I can sympathize with taking a month to compile some new binaries. Developers do after all have other things to do. Even a couple of months is acceptable. But SERIOUSLY, a team of people that maintain THE STANDARD F*CKING GAME PACKAGE USED BY A GAZILLION OTHER PYTHON PROJECTS but can't make one required update in the time-span of ONE HALF YEAR is a disgrace. No one cares if you are in the process of adding all sorts of awesome new crap to Pygame. Do you guys even have any idea how many python modules use Pygame for one reason or another? Until you actually have Pygame 1.8, COMPILE A GODDAMN 2.5 VERSION FOR THE OLD PYGAME!! How about some honesty? How about replacing "we needed an extra few weeks" on the pygame site with "we are not able to adequately maintain this package. new maintainers needed"? I know whoever maintains pygame aren't "paid". They don't "owe" anyone anything. But in my opinion, these people are a disgrace and a detriment to python game development efforts on the whole. Need Mail bonding? Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
On 2/15/07, Jer Juke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah, you heard me. Normally I wouldn't feel any need to pick out some random library and state how awful I think it is. But this is not "some random library". It is the "standard" game library for a most beautiful language known far and wide for it's power and easy of use, both when it comes to the language itself and it's libraries. The fact that Python is generally blessed with truly magnificent libraries everywhere is what makes Pygame stand so out. Pygame is in absolutely no way magnificent or even slightly pythonic. It's just a goddamn SDL wrapper. Using the name Pygame for this abhorrent library is an atrocity. It should be called PySDL, and make it more obvious to the python community that Pygame is yet to be properly created. But that's not the worst part. PySDL (what you all call Pygame) is actually a very useful library. It does what it does QUITE WELL! It's perfect for creating higher level libraries. BUT PYGAME DOESN'T EVEN MANAGE TO BE PYGAME. Yes, I am talking about the fact that even half a year after the official Python 2.5 came out, Pygame still does not EXIST FOR THIS PLATFORM. I can sympathize with taking a month to compile some new binaries. Developers do after all have other things to do. Even a couple of months is acceptable. But SERIOUSLY, a team of people that maintain THE STANDARD F*CKING GAME PACKAGE USED BY A GAZILLION OTHER PYTHON PROJECTS but can't make one required update in the time-span of ONE HALF YEAR is a disgrace. No one cares if you are in the process of adding all sorts of awesome new crap to Pygame. Do you guys even have any idea how many python modules use Pygame for one reason or another? Until you actually have Pygame 1.8, COMPILE A GODDAMN 2.5 VERSION FOR THE OLD PYGAME!! How about some honesty? How about replacing "we needed an extra few weeks" on the pygame site with "we are not able to adequately maintain this package. new maintainers needed"? I know whoever maintains pygame aren't "paid". They don't "owe" anyone anything. But in my opinion, these people are a disgrace and a detriment to python game development efforts on the whole. I think it would've taken a lot less time to compile some version (any version) of pygame for Python 2.5 than to write this message. You could've instead wrote a much shorter message about the fact that you compiled some version of pygame for python 2.5 on the platform you care about and included a link to where it could be obtained from. Would've been a lot more productive than a l*ng f*ck*ng r*nt about... not much. -bob
[pygame] alpha channel in font-rendered Surfaces
Hi,
I have a problem when trying to fade-in a text.
Using the alpha-channel when blitting in an image works fine, but not a
surface generated by Font.render().
Below is a complete example, (using two external files test.png and
freesansbold.ttf, replace with your own image and font).
I am new to pygame, so please bear with me.
Yours,
Goran
-
import pygame
pygame.init()
screensize = screenwidth, screenheight = 800, 600
# create a pygame "Surface" to draw on
screen = pygame.display.set_mode(screensize) # in window
screen.fill( (255,255,255) )
pygame.display.update()
pygame.time.wait(1000)
testimage = pygame.image.load("test.png").convert()
pygame.font.init()
font = pygame.font.Font('freesansbold.ttf',40)
fontimage = font.render('TESTIMAGE',1,(0,0,0));
testimage2 = fontimage.convert_alpha()
alphaVector = range(0,255,10)
for alpha in alphaVector:
testimage2.set_alpha( alpha )
screen.blit( testimage2, (0,0))
pygame.display.update()
pygame.time.wait(50)
print alpha
pygame.quit()
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
On 2/15/07, Jer Juke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [an angry diatribe] I believe the standard response to the problem you describe is to say something like, "if it's important to you, feel free to help us out and do some work to make it happen". But with the attitude you put on display here, I personally wouldn't ask for your "help" on any project I was involved in (but I can't speak for the pygame maintainers; perhaps they're more gracious than I am). -- // jack // http://www.nuthole.com
Re: [pygame] pygame is a disgrace
Jer, Don't try hide your feelings by sugarcoating things. Please tell us what you really think about Pygame... ; ) Jim On Feb 15, 2007, at 3:44 AM, Jer Juke wrote: Yeah, you heard me. Normally I wouldn't feel any need to pick out some random library and state how awful I think it is. But this is not "some random library". It is the "standard" game library for a most beautiful language known far and wide for it's power and easy of use, both when it comes to the language itself and it's libraries. The fact that Python is generally blessed with truly magnificent libraries everywhere is what makes Pygame stand so out. Pygame is in absolutely no way magnificent or even slightly pythonic. It's just a goddamn SDL wrapper. Using the name Pygame for this abhorrent library is an atrocity. It should be called PySDL, and make it more obvious to the python community that Pygame is yet to be properly created. But that's not the worst part. PySDL (what you all call Pygame) is actually a very useful library. It does what it does QUITE WELL! It's perfect for creating higher level libraries. BUT PYGAME DOESN'T EVEN MANAGE TO BE PYGAME. Yes, I am talking about the fact that even half a year after the official Python 2.5 came out, Pygame still does not EXIST FOR THIS PLATFORM. I can sympathize with taking a month to compile some new binaries. Developers do after all have other things to do. Even a couple of months is acceptable. But SERIOUSLY, a team of people that maintain THE STANDARD F*CKING GAME PACKAGE USED BY A GAZILLION OTHER PYTHON PROJECTS but can't make one required update in the time-span of ONE HALF YEAR is a disgrace. No one cares if you are in the process of adding all sorts of awesome new crap to Pygame. Do you guys even have any idea how many python modules use Pygame for one reason or another? Until you actually have Pygame 1.8, COMPILE A GODDAMN 2.5 VERSION FOR THE OLD PYGAME!! How about some honesty? How about replacing "we needed an extra few weeks" on the pygame site with "we are not able to adequately maintain this package. new maintainers needed"? I know whoever maintains pygame aren't "paid". They don't "owe" anyone anything. But in my opinion, these people are a disgrace and a detriment to python game development efforts on the whole. __ __ Need Mail bonding? Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
[pygame] pygame is a disgrace
Yeah, you heard me. Normally I wouldn't feel any need to pick out some random library and state how awful I think it is. But this is not "some random library". It is the "standard" game library for a most beautiful language known far and wide for it's power and easy of use, both when it comes to the language itself and it's libraries. The fact that Python is generally blessed with truly magnificent libraries everywhere is what makes Pygame stand so out. Pygame is in absolutely no way magnificent or even slightly pythonic. It's just a goddamn SDL wrapper. Using the name Pygame for this abhorrent library is an atrocity. It should be called PySDL, and make it more obvious to the python community that Pygame is yet to be properly created. But that's not the worst part. PySDL (what you all call Pygame) is actually a very useful library. It does what it does QUITE WELL! It's perfect for creating higher level libraries. BUT PYGAME DOESN'T EVEN MANAGE TO BE PYGAME. Yes, I am talking about the fact that even half a year after the official Python 2.5 came out, Pygame still does not EXIST FOR THIS PLATFORM. I can sympathize with taking a month to compile some new binaries. Developers do after all have other things to do. Even a couple of months is acceptable. But SERIOUSLY, a team of people that maintain THE STANDARD F*CKING GAME PACKAGE USED BY A GAZILLION OTHER PYTHON PROJECTS but can't make one required update in the time-span of ONE HALF YEAR is a disgrace. No one cares if you are in the process of adding all sorts of awesome new crap to Pygame. Do you guys even have any idea how many python modules use Pygame for one reason or another? Until you actually have Pygame 1.8, COMPILE A GODDAMN 2.5 VERSION FOR THE OLD PYGAME!! How about some honesty? How about replacing "we needed an extra few weeks" on the pygame site with "we are not able to adequately maintain this package. new maintainers needed"? I know whoever maintains pygame aren't "paid". They don't "owe" anyone anything. But in my opinion, these people are a disgrace and a detriment to python game development efforts on the whole. Need Mail bonding? Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
