GLAD loader for Delphi

[julkas 12]

GL/GLES/EGL/GLX/WGL Loader-Generator support for Delphi, FPC is here - https://github.com/Dav1dde/glad.

Tested with Delphi CE, FPC 3.0.4.

Examples:

https://github.com/Dav1dde/glad/tree/master/example/pascal

https://github.com/JulStrat/glad/tree/master/example/pascal.

If you have problems - open issue on https://github.com/JulStrat/glad or send me mail.

[David Schwartz 426]

19 hours ago, julkas said:

GL/GLES/EGL/GLX/WGL Loader-Generator support for Delphi, FPC is here - https://github.com/Dav1dde/glad.

Tested with Delphi CE, FPC 3.0.4.

Examples:

https://github.com/Dav1dde/glad/tree/master/example/pascal

https://github.com/JulStrat/glad/tree/master/example/pascal.

If you have problems - open issue on https://github.com/JulStrat/glad or send me mail.

Like so many projects people post on github these days, the README seems to cover everything EXCEPT: "What IS glad?" People are just supposed to know this stuff, or search around the internet to find out. Or, you don't care if anybody who doesn't already know what it is learns about it from your post -- IOW, you're basically just "preaching to a choir" and everybody else can just mosey along.

 

Sorry, I'm just exhausted dealing with lack of comments and descriptions of stuff the previous people who maintained the code apparently just kept in their heads. When I ask for help or explanations, I'm told, "Just fire up the debugger and step through the code..."

[julkas 12]

You can find more info about GLAD and other loaders here - https://www.khronos.org/opengl/wiki/OpenGL_Loading_Library

[David Schwartz 426]

So why isn't this stated in the README somewhere? That's my whole point.

[dummzeuch 1505]

2 hours ago, David Schwartz said:

 Sorry, I'm just exhausted dealing with lack of comments and descriptions of stuff the previous people who maintained the code apparently just kept in their heads. When I ask for help or explanations, I'm told, "Just fire up the debugger and step through the code..."

I would agree, if this were a commercial library. But this is an open source project, apparently maintained by a single person. You can, of course, expect what you want, but nobody is obliged to care.

You should have formulated it as a suggestion rather than a demand.

 

Writing documentation is usually less fun than coding and requires a different skill set, so most programmers expect to be paid for it as a compensation. In open source projects there usually is nobody who can pay them, so the documentation is lacking.

[David Schwartz 426]

There's an underlying assumption in most communications that requires you know your audience. People who do not fall into that assumed group won't follow what you're saying. It's like listening to a bunch of "inside jokes". How fun is that when you're not privy to what's happening "inside"?

 

If this were a PRIVATE library and this were a PRIVATE discussion between two people, that's fine. In that case, 100% of the participants know the background context.

 

The "open source" part is irrelevant. The fact is, it's taking place in a PUBLIC LIBRARY. There can be hundreds of people looking at it from all around the world, at different times and with completely different backgrounds and perspectives.

 

Adding a simple line at the top that answers the question "What is this about?" and maybe a link (as was offered above, independently of the content in the library) so people at least know what to look for would really be sufficient.

 

As a participant, if you think it's a private discussion, you're going to think it's implied, so why bother stating the obvious? But everything in github is PUBLIC! In general, that's not a valid assumption for over 99% of the people who might view it other than the one or two others you're communicating with.

 

Making a practice of adding a one-line description that answers the most obvious question everybody new to the page will have, "What is this about?", with maybe a link for more info, hardly requires a doctoral thesis.

 

What it DOES ENABLE is MORE INCLUSION AND PARTICIPATION BY OTHERS, which is supposedly the whole goal of the Open Source movement.

 

You don't need to write a damn book! It's a simple one-line description that answers the question, "What is this about?" and a link to learn more.

 

Otherwise, you're simply having a private conversation in a public forum that very few other people are able to follow.

 

And just to be clear, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that! But the OP posted a message here ANNOUNCING this open-source project and when I went to look, the first question I had -- "What is this about?" -- was not addressed anywhere! All I saw was bits of a private conversation between two people who knew exactly what each other was talking about, and everybody else was relegated to evesdropping. 

 

The popular retort is, "Well Google is your friend!" Hey, this is YOUR announcement! Why do you then say to ask Google if I want more information? Why did you bother to make the announcement in the first place? It's like getting in front of a group of several hundred people and announcing, "Hey, we're having a party!" and someone asks "When?" and you say, "ask Google!" and you walk away. I don't know about you, but I'm not wasting another second thinking about it. And I'm not asking Google because adding the Who, Where, and When part is too much trouble for you to mention after the What.

 

I'm guessing the OP posted that here because he wants people to look at the work, maybe see some value in it, perhaps get involved.

 

But if it cannot answer the basic question, "What is this about?" then what's the point of making the announcement? Ask Google? Really? Why bother making the announcement?

 

No, if you CHOOSE to make a public announcement about something, you owe it to your visitors to have at least one line at the beginning that answers the most obvious question every single one of them is going to have: WHAT IS THIS ABOUT?

 

How much time do you expect others to spend trying to answer that most fundamental question before they just turn and walk away?

 

This is a basic building block of how you include others in conversations or not. It happens at parties and social gatherings all the time -- you wander around, listening in on conversations here and there, to see if there's something interesting to follow or jump in on. If you're like most people, you wander around sampling lots of different conversations, and don't spend much time if you cannot get your bearings on what they're discussing. It's no different in public forums online.

[Fr0sT.Brutal 900]

Yeah, I'm +1 with David. With all the respects to all open-source developers, adding elementary line "What is this" helps much, adds friendliness to a project and teaches to structurize descriptions.

[dummzeuch 1505]

19 hours ago, David Schwartz said:

How much time do you expect others to spend trying to answer that most fundamental question before they just turn and walk away?

None at all. I don't expect anybody to put any effort into whatever, unless they are really interested. I have been proved right with that many times.

I have spent lots of time trying to write good documentation, comments  or bug reports. Some people do read it, but many simply don't and start asking questions that have already been answered. So why bother writing it?