Language Listings

[Dan]

Are you listed under a language if the engine is written in it or simply if it is accessible with that language? Also would you consider different version of a language such as Perl.NET or C++.NET to be under Perl and C++?

[Dia Kharrat]

Yes you are correct. Language listing is the language the engine is written in. Perl.NET, C++.NET is still counted under Perl and C++.

I hope this made it clear :)

We are still analyizing your other suggestion about language listing.

[xeonx]

Yes you are correct. Language listing is the language the engine is written in. Perl.NET, C++.NET is still counted under Perl and C++.


It seems that engines have considered the "Programming Languages" category to mean something different, something which I feel is more sensible for a listing. They have considered programming languages to be the languages from which the engine is accessible.

Just a few examples include Panda3D, WildTangent WebDriver, Revolution3D, TV3D SDK 6, Axiom, Irrlicht, Ovorp.

And these are just the ones that I have looked into. Additionally nearly every C# engine has been listed under VB.net even though they are written in C# and many list themselves under Delphi and C++ (other .NET languages). You can also find engines which list themselves under Delphi, VB 6, and C++ quite often. I find it more logical (and other engines have apparently assumed this as well) to list and engine by what languages it is accessible by, because that is really the only thing the users cares about and is what they will be searching for when clicking the "VB.net" tab under the engine library for engines they can use from their favorite language. If you want to list what language it was actually developed in (in which case less would be better) then i would suggest another category for that and at least a comment to explain the differences.

[NomadRock]

Similar seems to be the case for Operating Systems. They dont necessarily list the systems the game engine will run on, but those on which it _could_ be ported to "easily" or those on which just the server runs.

[xeonx]

Similar seems to be the case for Operating Systems. They dont necessarily list the systems the game engine will run on, but those on which it _could_ be ported to "easily" or those on which just the server runs.
12150



That would be an issue, and far more grave at that, because it literally renders the engine useless for the users who take the time to try it out based on that misinformation.

[Dia Kharrat]

Nomad: That's not how it actually works. The OSs are specified only when the engine as a whole works on that specific platform. Focus is generally given to the rendering side. In the case of Reality Engine where Linux was mentioned, it is a mistake that will be corrected.

xeonx, other than that, I believe so far it is accurate. The only problem is the language listing which we will try to find a suitable solution for to clear up potential confusion.

[xeonx]

xeonx, other than that, I believe so far it is accurate. The only problem is the language listing which we will try to find a suitable solution for to clear up potential confusion.
12157


What exactly is it that you consider to be accurate. Are you saying that all of the engines that are currently listed under many different languages are actually being developed in them? It is my take, especially with the engines that i listed above, that the languages from which the engine is accessible is listed instead of what it is developed in. I am actually can prove it for some of them based on what i have seen of the code-base on the knowledge of some of the projects. But my point is just that it seems more intuitive and useful for users if you changed the meaning of the programming languages to be what languages it is accessible from. This would even coincide with how the engine was actually listed in what is (what is my take on it) many different projects. Either way i think that a comment next to that feature name in the submit engine form would be able to clear up what the ambiguous nature of the category.

[xeonx]

I am sure that you probably get this a lot, but I am really grateful for the services that DevMaster.net provides. It allows me to generate interest for RealmForge, while at the same time provides a structure for me to define what features it has, which was previously a task that I wasn’t quite sure how to go about. I may be teaching a class at my school on game development, and I will be sure to cover DevMaster.net along with SourceForge.net and GameDev.net as one of the core resources for getting started. It has also happened to become aware of other 3D engines to better figure out how RealmForge stacks up to them and what features I need to work on.

I would like to help out in any way that I can and for know i will just remain critical and suggest misc. features incase you find them useful.

[Dia Kharrat]

I appreciate your informative post and positive comments. These kind of suggestions and comments will make this site an even better resource. The suggestions you have mentioned so far are great.

it allows me to generate interest for RealmForge, while at the same time provides a structure for me to define what features it hasThis is exactly one of the goals we are trying to accomplish!

Any help is appreciated. You could also help in writing some quality reviews for some engines you are familiar with.

[NomadRock]

What exactly is it that you consider to be accurate. Are you saying that all of the engines that are currently listed under many different languages are actually being developed in them?
12166


I think he was only talking about OS stuff, languages in general is a sticky subject. However I would say that if a language is listed then you are free to write a game in that language using the engine.

[Dia Kharrat]

xeonx, if the engine provides the necessary infrastructure to make it accessible from certain languages other than the language it is written in, then those languages can be listed under the language section. In some engines however, they have complete ports to other languages (like: Power Render, Revolution3D, etc.).

The original intention was to list the languages that the engine is written in, which would include the ports. But the meaning has moved towards what you said, which is: what language the engine is accessible in.

However, there should be limitations to how the decision is made whether the engine is accessible from a certain language or not. Language accessibility does not apply for engines which do not provide the infrastructure to use other languages. For example, if the engine is written in C, it is still accessible from Fortran, but not easily. The user would have to export the functions, rewrite the header file, etc. If the original engine developer did not do this, then the other languages (like fortran) should not be listed. Otherwise, if the developer provided the necessary files to use the other languages, then those languages can be listed. Some ways for providing the infrastructure is to use COM, or .NET.

We’ll modify the description of the language feature to better reflect this meaning.

[Guest]

We’ll modify the description of the language feature to better reflect this meaning.
12186


Thats great to hear. And .NET does allow access by many (hundreds now) of languages. Though many are novelties, it still supports every mainstream language that i can think of.

[xeonx]

NOTE* That was me