[Openal] Some frustrations with openAL sample code
chris.kcat at gmail.com
Fri Feb 29 09:22:55 PST 2008
On Friday 29 February 2008 08:37:37 am Scott Mayo wrote:
> Not being much of a Microsoft fan, I feel your pain. The bottom line is,
> it's openAL's job to handle this, even if it takes COM calls. I sympathize,
> I really do.
> But Vista's been out for over a year now, and it seems to me that if openAL
> is a serious
> offering, there's been time to get it to work with Vista. And that doesn't
> to have happened. And that's just plain frightening.
To note, I wasn't aware of the problem until fairly recently. I had actually
just gotten rid of the explicit ole32 dependancy when it came up. Plus it
uses a couple new IIDs and all new speaker defines that aren't in MinGW's
My general thought on it all is, if Microsoft doesn't even want to try to be
compatible with long-standing industry standards (sprintf_s? it uses the same
exact parameters as snprintf, which they only previously supported as
_snprintf. wtf), let alone itself, then they shouldn't be surprised when
things aren't compatible with them.
However, it appears my want for true cross-platform API compatibility is
stronger than that.
> Not to be a PITA, but I'm new here. Is OpenAL Soft different than the
> Generic Software interface?
OpenAL Soft is a seperate, open source, implementation that I'm working on.
It's mainly targeted at Linux and other Unix-like systems, but it works on
Windows as well.
You'll need to install CMake to build it, but it should compile/work with
whichever compiler you're using.
More information about the Openal