Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C++ > Graphics using C

Reply
Thread Tools

Graphics using C

 
 
DragonSt0rm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-21-2006
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> Can I use graphics in C to simulate a "fountain effect"? Is it
> possibile to use graphics in C? (Not in C++). Sorry to put this in C++
> discussion forum as I couldn't yet find a C discussion forum which is
> active.


Yes, this newsgroup is not the right place to ask about graphics.
But you already got some taliban-ic comments that will make you very confuse
so here is a non-fundamentalist answer:

If you want to do just simulation graphic, no standard user interface
software, I advise you to look at SDL: http://www.libsdl.org/index.php

Also, you can look at OpenGL for advanced 3D graphic capabilities.
And not only 3D, you can do cool 2D stuff with OpenGL too.
http://www.opengl.org/

If you want to develop a nice user interface software, then you can look for
GTK: http://www.gtk.org/
But keep in mind that doing complex GUI development in plain old C it is not
a trivial task.

I would rather advice you to learn C++ then use wxWidgets:
http://wxwidgets.org/ if you want to implement sophisticated GUI software.

Java is another alternative if you want to develop complex GUI.

All this libraries have their own blogs where you can ask details about
using that library.
If you came back in this puritan group with questions regarding SDL
functions they will grill you on the stake

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
kwikius
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-21-2006


Joey Sabey wrote:
> kwikius wrote:
> > All O.T here I'm afraid bud. C++ doesnt do graphics

>
> Heh, I'm just pointing out that you don't have to go in search of a new
> language to do graphics, that there are extensions to C++ for it.
> It can't hurt to point people in the direction of a solution to their
> problem. =P


C++ has no Graphical User Interface standard. There is nothing on which
to display any graphics. In fact there is no standard for text either.
Its kind of pathetic, but its true. A platform independent GUI for C++
wouldnt be hard to achieve, but there are a lot of commercial interests
that prefer things as they are.

regards
Andy little

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bo Persson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-21-2006
kwikius wrote:
> Joey Sabey wrote:
>> kwikius wrote:
>>> All O.T here I'm afraid bud. C++ doesnt do graphics

>>
>> Heh, I'm just pointing out that you don't have to go in search of
>> a new language to do graphics, that there are extensions to C++
>> for it.
>> It can't hurt to point people in the direction of a solution to
>> their problem. =P

>
> C++ has no Graphical User Interface standard. There is nothing on
> which to display any graphics. In fact there is no standard for
> text either. Its kind of pathetic, but its true. A platform
> independent GUI for C++ wouldnt be hard to achieve, but there are a
> lot of commercial interests that prefer things as they are.
>


Some of us would like a platform native GUI with a portable API. That's
hard!

Java isn't platform independent at all, it just brings it's own platform
around.


Bo Persson


 
Reply With Quote
 
kwikius
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-21-2006

Bo Persson wrote:
> kwikius wrote:
> > Joey Sabey wrote:
> >> kwikius wrote:
> >>> All O.T here I'm afraid bud. C++ doesnt do graphics
> >>
> >> Heh, I'm just pointing out that you don't have to go in search of
> >> a new language to do graphics, that there are extensions to C++
> >> for it.
> >> It can't hurt to point people in the direction of a solution to
> >> their problem. =P

> >
> > C++ has no Graphical User Interface standard. There is nothing on
> > which to display any graphics. In fact there is no standard for
> > text either. Its kind of pathetic, but its true. A platform
> > independent GUI for C++ wouldnt be hard to achieve, but there are a
> > lot of commercial interests that prefer things as they are.
> >

>
> Some of us would like a platform native GUI with a portable API. That's
> hard!


I've only looked at two platforms Windows and Linux. I havent looked at
Mac but AFAIK the system there is an extension of X, which is the basis
of Unix systems. In Windows you have the SDK and on Linux you have X11
and the Xt Intrinsics. If you look above the prehistoric raw code in
both systems, they are remarkably similar. It appears to me that at
various times one or both ceratinly borrowed ideas from each other. To
my eye it doesnt look that hard to wrap both in terms of one API.

Second it has been done in several incarnations

look at Qt, Ultimate++, GtK and wxWidgets. These are all successful.

Ultimate++ looks the more modern. GtK and wXWidgets expose a lot of raw
pointers, which makes coding pretty ugly. Having never used Qt I can't
coment but by all accounts like the other systems it reinvents the
wheel. (Maybe because many of these implementations predate the C++
standard). They all prefer their own strings and containers and so on
and so forth. This is a problem.

The other issues with these libraries is licensing. Qt licensing is
weird. If you do commercial development it costs you good money. As for
the others they all AFAIK use some form of 'free' license which puts me
off as I'm not a lawyer, but I really don't want to bundle source code
with all my apps or point application users who frankly couldnt care
less in most cases at the source.

Apart from all this the interface, IOW main window, menus buttons,
controls ("widgets") ,modal dialogs and so on and so forth and their
functionality is essentially sorted across platforms and has been for
many years, and there are various UI standards around. IOW the hard
work of how to design a GUI has basically been done. All thats needed
is to hide all that ugly casting behind a nice interface.... Simple
really

> Java isn't platform independent at all, it just brings it's own platform
> around.


Well at least they have a GUI (or two) though !

regards
Andy Little

 
Reply With Quote
 
kwikius
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-21-2006

Bo Persson wrote:
> kwikius wrote:
> > Joey Sabey wrote:
> >> kwikius wrote:
> >>> All O.T here I'm afraid bud. C++ doesnt do graphics
> >>
> >> Heh, I'm just pointing out that you don't have to go in search of
> >> a new language to do graphics, that there are extensions to C++
> >> for it.
> >> It can't hurt to point people in the direction of a solution to
> >> their problem. =P

> >
> > C++ has no Graphical User Interface standard. There is nothing on
> > which to display any graphics. In fact there is no standard for
> > text either. Its kind of pathetic, but its true. A platform
> > independent GUI for C++ wouldnt be hard to achieve, but there are a
> > lot of commercial interests that prefer things as they are.
> >

>
> Some of us would like a platform native GUI with a portable API. That's
> hard!


I've only looked at two platforms Windows and Linux. I havent looked at
Mac but AFAIK the system there is an extension of X, which is the basis
of Unix systems. In Windows you have the SDK and on Linux you have X11
and the Xt Intrinsics. If you look above the prehistoric raw code in
both systems, they are remarkably similar. It appears to me that at
various times one or both ceratinly borrowed ideas from each other. To
my eye it doesnt look that hard to wrap both in terms of one API.

Second it has been done in several incarnations

look at Qt, Ultimate++, GtK and wxWidgets. These are all successful.

Ultimate++ looks the more modern. GtK and wXWidgets expose a lot of raw
pointers, which makes coding pretty ugly. Having never used Qt I can't
coment but by all accounts like the other systems it reinvents the
wheel. (Maybe because many of these implementations predate the C++
standard). They all prefer their own strings and containers and so on
and so forth. This is a problem.

The other issues with these libraries is licensing. Qt licensing is
weird. If you do commercial development it costs you good money. As for
the others they all AFAIK use some form of 'free' license which puts me
off as I'm not a lawyer, but I really don't want to bundle source code
with all my apps or point application users who frankly couldnt care
less in most cases at the source.

Apart from all this the interface, IOW main window, menus buttons,
controls ("widgets") ,modal dialogs and so on and so forth and their
functionality is essentially sorted across platforms and has been for
many years, and there are various UI standards around. IOW the hard
work of how to design a GUI has basically been done. All thats needed
is to hide all that ugly casting behind a nice interface.... Simple
really

> Java isn't platform independent at all, it just brings it's own platform
> around.


Well at least they have a GUI (or two) though !

regards
Andy Little

 
Reply With Quote
 
Eberhard Schefold
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-21-2006
kwikius wrote:

> Joey Sabey wrote:
>> kwikius wrote:


>>> C++ cant handle graphics. Its just a text langauage


>> Ever heard of the OpenGL library?

>
> I cant find it in my copy of the C++ standard.


It is impossible to write novels in the English language. I found no
instructions for that in my grammar book.
 
Reply With Quote
 
kwikius
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-21-2006

Eberhard Schefold wrote:
> kwikius wrote:
>
> > Joey Sabey wrote:
> >> kwikius wrote:

>
> >>> C++ cant handle graphics. Its just a text langauage

>
> >> Ever heard of the OpenGL library?

> >
> > I cant find it in my copy of the C++ standard.

>
> It is impossible to write novels in the English language.


Yeah. I know... weird isnt it? but off topic sadly.

regards
Andy Little

 
Reply With Quote
 
Mirek Fidler
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2006


On Nov 21, 2:23 pm, "kwikius" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> The other issues with these libraries is licensing. Qt licensing is
> weird. If you do commercial development it costs you good money. As for
> the others they all AFAIK use some form of 'free' license which puts me
> off as I'm not a lawyer, but I really don't want to bundle source code
> with all my apps or point application users who frankly couldnt care
> less in most cases at the source.


Ultimate++ is BSD licensed -> you can do whatever you want with it
except redistributing the source tree with copyright info removed.

Mirek

 
Reply With Quote
 
kwikius
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2006

Mirek Fidler wrote:
> On Nov 21, 2:23 pm, "kwikius" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > The other issues with these libraries is licensing. Qt licensing is
> > weird. If you do commercial development it costs you good money. As for
> > the others they all AFAIK use some form of 'free' license which puts me
> > off as I'm not a lawyer, but I really don't want to bundle source code
> > with all my apps or point application users who frankly couldnt care
> > less in most cases at the source.

>
> Ultimate++ is BSD licensed -> you can do whatever you want with it
> except redistributing the source tree with copyright info removed.
>
> Mirek


Hi Mirek,

I have been perusing Ultimate++ from time to time, but only the docs
rather than code. It looks very comprehensive and very interesting. My
main interest is in somehow or other trying to get together a GUI
proposal to submit as part of the C++ standard. FWIW I don't expect
that to be happening any time soon!, (Some corners might argue that I
am about the last person to succeed at that), but nevertheless as
nobody else seems to be doing anything about it I am working slowly
away at it. Therefore I am trying to look at the various C++ GUI
libraries out there and certain parts of Ultimate++ look attractive.

The main problem is that a standards proposal would I assume, expect
where at all possible the components of the current standard library to
be used. Obviously this is a big problem where Ultimate++ is concerned.

The extensive nature of the lib is also a problem simply from the point
of view of trying to provide standards quality documentation.

Anyway, *If* I get further along with the standards proposal and
especially where there is a crossover or I see something from
Ultimate++ that might be incorporated I would certainly like to get in
touch to get your views about it.

regards
Andy Little

 
Reply With Quote
 
Mirek Fidler
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2006

kwikius wrote:

> proposal to submit as part of the C++ standard. FWIW I don't expect
> that to be happening any time soon!


Yep, 2018 seems to be the nearest possible term

> am about the last person to succeed at that), but nevertheless as
> nobody else seems to be doing anything about it I am working slowly
> away at it. Therefore I am trying to look at the various C++ GUI
> libraries out there and certain parts of Ultimate++ look attractive.


Ah, I just wanted to supply the licensing info. But thanks.

> The main problem is that a standards proposal would I assume, expect
> where at all possible the components of the current standard library to
> be used. Obviously this is a big problem where Ultimate++ is concerned.


Yes. The aim was to build the optimal library/platform, not the
standard one

> Anyway, *If* I get further along with the standards proposal and
> especially where there is a crossover or I see something from
> Ultimate++ that might be incorporated I would certainly like to get in
> touch to get your views about it.


You are welcome. I am quite pessimistic w.r.t. standard C++ GUI and I
am very pessimistic about "STL-boosted" C++ future, but do not feel shy
to ask for help or info (e.g. in U++ forum).

Mirek

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Intel HD Graphics 3000 and Intel HD Graphics 2000 Review Ian Front Page News 0 02-24-2011 03:07 PM
Best graphics program to lecture students with graphics tablet Mrs. Chickpea Digital Photography 8 05-26-2008 04:54 AM
Upgrading graphics on a computer with Integrated Graphics sharonf Computer Support 3 03-27-2007 06:21 AM
Gizmodo: NVIDIA Ships 128-Core Graphics Cards for High-End Film Editors Graphics Pros Silverstrand Front Page News 0 03-05-2007 03:32 PM
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900 Graphics Harvey Gratt Computer Support 3 10-09-2005 02:40 AM



Advertisments