Allegro pull requests

[DarkDragon]

What is "this"?

I've working on fixing the issues the Allegro folks pointed out (I didn't correctly apply the 4.2 patch to 4.4) and should be done later this evening.

[Gleeok]

@Gleeok : Are you working on this? I've been waiting for an update from you.

Sorry, must of missed this (pun intended).

What DD said. Not sure. If you mean the AS scripting I am messing around different ideas of getting scripts to "inherit" from c++ code and whatnot - kind of off and on. If you mean the atomic fix then no.

[ZoriaRPG]

Sorry, must of missed this (pun intended).

What DD said. Not sure. If you mean the AS scripting I am messing around different ideas of getting scripts to "inherit" from c++ code and whatnot - kind of off and on. If you mean the atomic fix then no.

@Gleeok and @DarkDragon

I meant the atomic fix. Should I just go with std::atomic and roll with it? I want to try fixing the libs before I compile them again. One nice thing about 4.4.3, is that the main deps are included, so it seems that it is no longer mandatory to do all the extra build steps at this point. I just wish that I knew with certainty what was needed to fix this, as it seems that the two of you have very different ideas on what is needed, and how to proceed.

You both seemed ready to tackle it, so I was waiting to see the results. I am not going to hack ASM back in to the library for a variety of reasons. THe most important, being that it is likely going to cripple it in the future, and it would never be pulled into the main 4.4.3 repo.

My plate has been pretty full of late, with many work-related requirements placed on me shoulders. I want to fix the libs, and make the needed fixes to 2.53, and simply be done with it, so that I can get back to working on master, and interim stuff.

[DarkDragon]

You both seemed ready to tackle it, so I was waiting to see the results.

Sure, I'll do it.

[Gleeok]

@Gleeok and @DarkDragon

I meant the atomic fix. Should I just go with std::atomic and roll with it? I want to try fixing the libs before I compile them again. One nice thing about 4.4.3, is that the main deps are included, so it seems that it is no longer mandatory to do all the extra build steps at this point. I just wish that I knew with certainty what was needed to fix this, as it seems that the two of you have very different ideas on what is needed, and how to proceed.

You both seemed ready to tackle it, so I was waiting to see the results. I am not going to hack ASM back in to the library for a variety of reasons. THe most important, being that it is likely going to cripple it in the future, and it would never be pulled into the main 4.4.3 repo.

My plate has been pretty full of late, with many work-related requirements placed on me shoulders. I want to fix the libs, and make the needed fixes to 2.53, and simply be done with it, so that I can get back to working on master, and interim stuff.

Only problem is std::atomic is c++.

Sure. Point me to the 4.4.3 files (I'm assuming you guys are wanting to upgrade to the elusive dot three now) in the ZC master repo that need fixing (unless it's just wwin.c) and I'll give it a shot.


[edit] I should of hit reply hours ago before I got distracted and made dinner, not after. ..hardly counts as being ninja'd... Oh well, whatever.

[DarkDragon]

I just pushed a fix here: https://github.com/ArmageddonGames/a...060943e157cfa3

[Gleeok]

I just pushed a fix here: https://github.com/ArmageddonGames/a...060943e157cfa3

Great. Maybe now we'll get a rainbow without the death crash.


Completely hypothetical question for you: Do you think this is more likely to manifest on newer computers because of increased core counts and more complex (read: stupid ms windows) kernel scheduling? ...Like, for example, might something similar to this affect crash occurrence in theory if it didn't interrupt or block as much:

	SetProcessAffinityMask(GetCurrentProcess(), 1);
	SetThreadAffinityMask(GetCurrentThread(), 1);

?

Just a random thought.

[ZoriaRPG]

Well, this is certainly fun. MSVC 2008 chokes and dies compiling this CMake build of ag 4.4.3. I might need some of your includes, whatever you used, as the headers for stdint.h and inttypes.h fail to compile on MSVC9, and there are some major issues with a few of the allegro source files, too.

Have a look:

https://pastebin.com/wesKpgFu

Are the errors in color.c resulting from our changes, and thus, our fault?

Likewise, for config.c/h? I know that I've compiled this bastard before in MSYS, and I may need to go that route again.

I suspect that no-one even bothered to try compiling the build for Windows using MSVC9, as all of the allegro users are Linux blokes. THose who build it on Windows use MSYS/MinGW, which is the opposite of our conundrum for ZC.

[DarkDragon]

Are the errors in color.c resulting from our changes, and thus, our fault?

Nope.

Are you *sure* you're trying to compile the right thing? Branch "4.4-ZCfixes" of https://github.com/ArmageddonGames/allegro5? The line numbers in your pasted output do not make a lot of sense.

[DarkDragon]

Great. Maybe now we'll get a rainbow without the death crash.


Completely hypothetical question for you: Do you think this is more likely to manifest on newer computers because of increased core counts and more complex (read: stupid ms windows) kernel scheduling? ...Like, for example, might something similar to this affect crash occurrence in theory if it didn't interrupt or block as much:

    SetProcessAffinityMask(GetCurrentProcess(), 1);
    SetThreadAffinityMask(GetCurrentThread(), 1);

?

Just a random thought.

Could be. But if the keyboard thread doesn't run as often, that can also cause problems (slow response to keyboard input, missed keys, etc).