AECforWebAssembly
magnum
AECforWebAssembly | magnum | |
---|---|---|
51 | 22 | |
31 | 4,658 | |
- | - | |
8.0 | 9.6 | |
6 days ago | 7 days ago | |
C++ | C++ | |
MIT License | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
AECforWebAssembly
-
Gren 0.3: Source maps
Great! I have not yet made source maps for my programming language that compiles to WebAssembly, and I probably never will.
- Mislite li da okolina ima potpuno pogrešno mišljenje o ljudima koji rade u IT-u?
- Koja je najapsurdnija poruka o pogrešci koju je neki vaš program ispisivao?
-
What is the most absurd error message your compiler/interpreter was once outputting?
Up until today, my AEC-to-WebAssembly was, if somebody tried to use two structures of different types as the second and the third operand to the ?: (ternary conditional) operator, as in this example: ``` Structure First Consists Of Nothing; EndStructure
- Poteškoće s pronalaskom posla
-
Good languages for writing compilers in?
Well, I have written the first compiler for my programming language, targetting x86, in IE6-compatible JavaScript, and the second compiler, targetting WebAssembly, has been written in C++11. I think that, to choose a language to write a compiler in, you need to look at at least two things:
-
Why does GCC run in Docker produce around 30% smaller statically linked C++ executables than GCC run on Linux? AECforWebAssembly is 1.08 MB large if compiled using GCC 13.1 in Docker, but it is 1.59 MB if compiled using GCC 13.1 on Debian.
You can see the releases v2.5.3 and v2.5.2 of AECforWebAssembly on GitHub. They are produced with the same version of GCC, the only difference (as far as I know) is that v2.5.2 was produced directly on Debian, whereas v2.5.3 was cross-compiled from Windows to Linux using Docker.
-
Let's Make Sure Github Doesn't Become the only Option
That could be true. I host my AEC-to-WebAssembly compiler on GitHub, GitLab and SourceForge, and it's only on GitHub that it has 21 stars and 2 forks. On GitLab and SourceForge, it has zero of both.
- koliko vam je bilo tesko nac posao u programiranju?
-
Does the JVM / CLR even make sense nowadays?
Well, the main compiler for my programming language is targetting the JavaScript Virtual Machine by outputting WebAssembly. I think it's even better than targetting Java Virtual Machine, because, for one thing, your executables can run in any modern browser if you output WebAssembly. If you target Java Virtual Machine, the users need to actually download your app. Furthermore, there is an official assembler for WebAssembly called WebAssembly Binary Toolkit (WABT), so your compiler can output assembly and not have to deal with binary files. There is nothing equivalent to that for Java Virtual Machine.
magnum
-
Want to a 3D game without a game engine but not having to deal with opengl stuff ?
Magnum
-
Good graphics engines to visualize my physics framework?
If you want something that gives you more control you could use magnum.
-
100,000 subscriber celebration – Ask the Godot contributors anything!
Therefore, in terms of artist mindshare, Blender is the leading open source 3D creation program, but not the leading 3D creation program. I think Godot is already in a similar situation, and has been for a few years now. In comparison, most other open source game engines have focused on providing low-level functionality. These certainly fulfill a niche, but in my experience, most people want something that works at a higher level and comes with a built-in editor.
-
Looking for a 2D/3D rendering layer for C++
Magnum is worth checking out.
-
Simple light graphics library for c++?
Since you want something lightweight, I'll assume you mean the former. If that's the case, then checkout bgfx or Magnum. Magnum does include some extra features typically found in a graphics engine.
-
Best C++ libraries for 2D game development
You could try Magnum it wraps SDL and others, but you might find it maybe too low-level. It's certainly not Love2D.
-
Exceptions: Yes or No?
C++ is similar to C in that there are multiple "styles" of use that vary from project to project. Other, usually newer languages (C#, Python, Rust, etc) tend to have a stronger sense of what idioms should be used. Whereas, for instance, some C++ projects (like some GUI libraries and game/graphics engines) will partially/entirely replace the STL (and older ones may have been around before C++ had a standard library aside from C's), or forbid the use of certain C++ features (example).
-
What is a good absolutely minimalist game/rendering engine?
Magnum Graphics
- C++ Game Engine - Which framework?
-
Magnum: Lightweight, modular C++11 graphics middleware for games/visualization
> He has Vulkan support in here with a clearly marked file named Pipeline.cpp. The guy knows what a pipeline is...
There is a Vulkan API wrapper. However, there is no "Vk Renderer" -- no code seems to use the Vulkan parts of the code system, and the two projects seem unrelated.
> * Is this not a UBO interface?
There are ways of making a uniform buffer, however the examples don't cover them and the API doesn't adapt automatically. See how all of the setters assert if UBOs are enabled.
https://github.com/mosra/magnum/blob/cfc02599e54e02337dd56bb...
> * I don't see why you think there's limited support for multiple framebuffers...?
The code I do see is about binding/unbinding framebuffers in a stateful manner, e.g. AbstractFramebuffer::bind(), rather than supporting passes.
> None of your criticism seem well intentioned. It might behoove you to give people the benefit of the doubt and realize that you may be able to learn something from them, even if they're so clearly inferior to you.
To put it simply, I've taught enough graphics to know first-hand the kinds of misconceptions that OpenGL-styled APIs can cause, and I'm just a bit tired to see it continue. Admittedly I was a bit harsh, I don't mean any harm towards the author. There are just graphics APIs with interfaces I consider to be much better designed.
What are some alternatives?
Lark - Lark is a parsing toolkit for Python, built with a focus on ergonomics, performance and modularity.
bgfx - Cross-platform, graphics API agnostic, "Bring Your Own Engine/Framework" style rendering library.
wasm-fizzbuzz - WebAssembly from Scratch: From FizzBuzz to DooM.
Ogre 3D - scene-oriented, flexible 3D engine (C++, Python, C#, Java)
mal - mal - Make a Lisp
OpenSceneGraph - OpenSceneGraph git repository
Drogon-torch-serve - Serve pytorch / torch models using Drogon
GLFW - A multi-platform library for OpenGL, OpenGL ES, Vulkan, window and input
libCat - 🐈⬛ A runtime for C++26 w/out libC or POSIX. Smaller binaries, only arena allocators, SIMD, stronger type safety than STL, and value-based errors!
Cinder - Cinder is a community-developed, free and open source library for professional-quality creative coding in C++.
gdal-js - This is an Emscripten port of GDAL, an open source X/MIT licensed translator library for raster and vector geospatial data formats.
urho3d - Game engine