this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2023
2054 points (98.2% liked)

Programmer Humor

32495 readers
849 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's cool anyway, I never tried any "low level" graphics, so it looks rather magic to me, also because it's Nim, which I know only by name and hipster blogposts/videos (can I add it to my resume after 100 seconds?)

or this meme frame made in Godot 3).

That's hilarious and totally rad, all I can say is I wish for Godot to keep growing, maybe then bindings for niche languages will be improved as well

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That’s cool anyway, I never tried any “low level” graphics, so it looks rather magic to me

I wouldn't say what I've done is low-level (especially with <20 lines of code and not OpenGL-level stuff), and Nim offers functions that makes stuff easier. Certainly you can do low-level stuff with Nim, but I'm interested in it because I don't think I could do C/C++ stuff (at least not how it normally looks) but I still want performance/flexibility.

I wish for Godot to keep growing, maybe then bindings for niche languages will be improved as well

There are actually production-ready Nim bindings for 3.X, but 4.X uses a different system (supposedly better for integration of compiled languages) and the makers of the old bindings didn't want to do a new effort. Multiple individuals are/were working on it, but 4.0 was released a while ago. And understandably it's a complex thing.

3.X vs 4.X is a big enough jump for me that it doesn't really make sense to just use 3.X.