Re: SLAYER announcement and help request for preparing a GNU package

[Panicz Maciej Godek <godek.maciek@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2948 bytes --]

2013/5/7 Javier Sancho <jsf@jsancho.org>

> Panicz Maciej Godek wrote:
> > I even managed to build it, but for some reasons the demos won't run. I
> get
> > the following error:
> > gacela/video.scm:175:2: In procedure init-gl:
> > gacela/video.scm:175:2: In procedure module-lookup: Unbound variable:
> > set-gl-hint
>
> The reason is, oh my god, you are the first who test my code.
>

:) I guess that's how it begins.
I'm trying to build a portable package for slayer, and I must say that in a
way it's much more difficult than programming (which is actually a great
pleasure) -- there's a lot of reading and figuring out how to 'get it right'

When I started this project, I made demos and some documentation, but
> I stopped maintaining them because nobody was interested. Makefiles
> compile OpenGL and SDL bindings, but now I use Figl and compilation is
> not needed. The error with set-gl-hint comes because I have a figl
> version with some improvements. I've sent patches to figl maintainers.
>

I've applied all three patches, and I got a new error:
gacela/games/guybrush$ ./guybrush.scm
[xcb] Unknown request in queue while dequeuing
[xcb] Most likely this is a multi-threaded client and XInitThreads has not
been called
[xcb] Aborting, sorry about that.
guile: ../../src/xcb_io.c:178: dequeue_pending_request: Assertion
`!xcb_xlib_unknown_req_in_deq' failed.
Abort (core dumped)

gacela/games/tetris$ ./tetris.scm
XIO:  fatal IO error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server
":0.0"
      after 129 requests (128 known processed) with 18 events remaining.

Currently, Gacela is in a very unstable state. Demos, for example, use
> an old version with a more OOP style, because when I wrote them I was
> beginning to understand Lisp and functional programming. But actually
> I'm reestructuring all the code looking for a more elegant, beatiful,
> functional style.
>
>
I don't think those two paradigms rule each other out. I believe that games
and user interfaces are the cases where OOP feels at home, but it seems a
good practice to avoid mutable variables wherever they're unnecessary. I
think John Carmack is quite just in this regard:
http://www.altdevblogaday.com/2012/04/26/functional-programming-in-c/


> > If it comes to code, I see that you have a more polling-style approach
> for
> > processing input. My desire is to get a system that never stops being
> > reconfigurable -- to truly separate the user interface from program
> logics.
> > I don't know if it's achievable, but I have a feeling that such
> direction is
> > worth exploring
>
> Yes, your style is more callback style. I personally prefer polling
> because then I can read the code sequentially. But it's a personal
> consideration.
>
> > All these concepts sound very interesting, but I'm curious whether they
> are
> > reflected the code somewhere.
>
> For the moment, no. But I have a lot of papers :-)
>

I'm curious where will it go :)

regards

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4559 bytes --]