5 Replies
I'm interested in your reasons here. Are you worried for a performance impact? Binary Size? etc.
Genuienly interested here
cons: i was worried about perf before since the virtual dispatch tables had a lot of indirection going on. also disliked the need to pass around a Vk object.
pros: i absolutely loved how extensions were their own objects and how easy it was to load them.
mixed: i wanted to stay close to C names because i am planning to port my game to zig (or worse, c++) some day
the indirection per call could be greatly alleviated by using a concrete type internally but i just gave up due to the other reasons
👍 those seem like good reasons. Don't think we can do much about the C-like names but the dispatches I am aware (its still great to hear this so I know to prioritise it a bit more)
i'm just in a perpetual state of "should i use C# or not"
and having C-like names and being forced to use unsafe/pointers makes the code almost ready to just be copy-pasted to another language 
use silk.net for opengl though 👀
use silk.net for opengl though 👀i'm just in a perpetual state of "should i use C# or not"I get that 😛 I mean I have a few ideas what we can do to help here, but they feel a bit too narrow to implement, will think about this though. We aren't propietary and have no reason to lock you into anything