Lutris Updated With D3D12 DLL Provided By VKD3D-Proton

[Auzy]

they didn't accept Vulkan backend in the first until see doitsujin dxvk dev succeeded and win valve support

Got a link explaining why they didn't accept it? It's probably not the right way of doing things long term..

Just FYI, Linus rejects patches all the time. Just because it fixes one use case, doesn't mean it's the best solution for all.. Sometimes as a leader, you have to make decisions people don't like.. Otherwise we'd still be using DevFS instead of uDev for 20 years with no maintainer.

they don't won't C++ in wine code for unknown reasons

The reason's are unknown to you only..

C++ / OOP doesn't magically make things better. In fact, bad OOP code is WORSE than C code, and you increase the barrier to entry.. You also increase the bugs, and if you run both C++/C, you just introduce a whole bunch of new issues.. GREAT! Yes, just rewrite 27 years of code so it can be OOP for no reason, and to reduce the number of developers who can assist..

Linus Torvalds (who wrote Linux from scratch), also doesn't use C++. But hey, maybe try explaining to the Linux kernel team why he's mismanaging one of the most popular OS's on the planet.

Refer to https://www.reddit.com/r/programming..._written_in_c/

they only support C89 to support Microsoft Visual C compiler ????

Linux Kernel uses C90 apparently.. So, you better tell Linus he's wrong too (these days, he is a lot more passive, so he won't totally destroy you). Updating standards for the sake of doing so with marginal benefit, is silly.

And you don't think it's a good idea to be able to test the codebase using a reference compiler? There's a lot in development languages that are ambiguous, and there is a lot of bugs in compilers. So, the benefits could potentially be to identify these ambiguitities between the two, so they can replicate them. Some apps rely on these small bugs to operate correctly.

What do you expect to gain by using a new version?

It's a cleary they don't understand how "Clean room" design work

https://wiki.winehq.org/Clean_Room_Guidelines That list seems fairly accurate to me. What part of it suggests they don't understand?

if I decided to do something about this mess I will rewrite wine from scratch with rust or something

WOW, GREAT IDEA!!! Good luck with that.

You do realise that Wine has a 27 years head start in development, and almost any developer programs in C, whereas barely any have experience with Rust (a 6 year old programming language, which many developers aren't even writing their code purely in yet, because it's not ready). Furthermore, parts of Windows (like copy protection) might even rely on unsafe memory operations. This is possibly the dumbest thing I've heard someone say for a while (thinking it's an easy task).

I ported plenty of my projects to other languages because I thought it was better (Driver On Demand was written in Perl, and I ported it to D, because I thought it was a better language). Huge mistake.. I wasted time doing the rewrite, and it introduced huge new bugs (including one I couldn't fix at the time, but years later I spoke to Walter Bright randomly on reddit, and he finally recognised the problem with the bug, and fixed it, so huge kudos to him ).

THEY LITERALLY are at the point that most apps run now with minor help. They reverse engineered most of the Windows API.. Yet, sure, they should definitely take your advice.

I also love the fact that you're comparing them to the most successful Linux desktop at the moment, which also has the most usability (which is why Ubuntu uses it)... Given the success of these projects, are you sure that perhaps YOU'RE not the worst decision maker?

[JoshuaAshton]

> C++ / OOP doesn't magically make things better. In fact, bad OOP code is WORSE than C code, and you increase the barrier to entry.. You also increase the bugs, and if you run both C++/C, you just introduce a whole bunch of new issues.. GREAT! Yes, just rewrite 27 years of code so it can be OOP for no reason, and to reduce the number of developers who can assist..

I like C++ when implementing C++ APIs. :^)

Personally I am not a fan of Wine's C-style as it lends itself to be unsafe and easy to shoot yourself in the foot with uninitialized/old memory.
I wish they would at least embrace inline declaration + assignment, designated initialization and compound initializers.
It's 2020, there is no reason not to in my opinion. It just makes things way more annoying.

> What do you expect to gain by using a new version?

I expect to be able to write readable and safe code without seeing 0xcccccccc in my debugger.
Dealing with the Wine coding style + Vulkan pNext chains hurts my brain, I usually just end up writing it my own, sane way, and then butchering it after.

> Linux Kernel uses C90 apparently.. So, you better tell Linus he's wrong too (these days, he is a lot more passive, so he won't totally destroy you). Updating standards for the sake of doing so with marginal benefit, is silly.

The Linux kernel uses whatever it wants to with a million and one GNU extensions.

[pal666]

they don't won't C++ in wine code for unknown reasons

the reason is they don't know c++

if I decided to do something about this mess I will rewrite wine from scratch with rust or something

but since rust rewriters are busy writing forum posts, someone else has to write software in real language

[mos87]

gotta love this type of software... lutris, play.it, playonlinux.. Still vividly remember when in the noughties CD|DVD burning was in its heyday and 99% topics on various Linux-related forums were stupid questions from people trying to use the so-called user-friendly frontends to the free burning tools, mostly K3B coming from the latter unable to find the actual utility to burn (cdrecord/wodim/etc) and/or from asking the "feature-rich and omnipresent" K3B to do what it never could (like master a DVD-video or convert some stupid proprietary image format to something usable... was even funnier when the given .nero or whatever was just a renamed iso)
Endless pages of entropy and blind leading the blind were generated. And this only got worse since then))

[pal666]

C++ / OOP doesn't magically make things better. In fact, bad OOP code is WORSE than C code, and you increase the barrier to entry..

in fact c++ is not an object oriented language and there's plenty of oop code written in c, including in linux kernel which you used as example.

You also increase the bugs

it's a lie, it reduces the bugs

, and if you run both C++/C, you just introduce a whole bunch of new issues..

most c++ programs contain pieces of c code, c++ was explicitly designed for it, again nothing but lies from you.

GREAT! Yes, just rewrite 27 years of code so it can be OOP for no reason, and to reduce the number of developers who can assist..

i've already pointed out your confusion of c++ with oop. now you are suggesting rewrite. did dxvk rewrite 27 years of code?

Linus Torvalds (who wrote Linux from scratch), also doesn't use C++.

another lie. linus torvalds has ported his program subsurface from c and gtk to c++ and qt many years ago

Linux Kernel uses C90 apparently.. So, you better tell Linus he's wrong too

linus had no choice, when he started linux there were no c++. but what fucking relation does linux have with wine? wine isn't os kernel, it's user application which is easy to switch to c++. why you don't compare wine with gcc, which switched from k&r to c++? gcc was even older than linux and wine. why you don't compare wine with gdb which switched to c++11? why you don't compare wine with every major compiler, browser or office suite? because you found some stupid uneducated linus quote from several decades ago?
and btw, the language used by kernel isn't c90. it's called "sparse" https://sparse.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/ (because, you know, c90 sucks)

And you don't think it's a good idea to be able to test the codebase using a reference compiler?

what makes you think microsoft c from nineties is a reference compiler for dx12?

What do you expect to gain by using a new version?

more productive environment. just compare success of dxvk to wine counterpart

[pal666]

Got a link explaining why they didn't accept it? It's probably not the right way of doing things long term..

they didn't accept it because their (paying)target audience is macos users who have no vulkan. long term opengl is dead. basically, you live in some inverted reality

[skeevy420]

That doesn't answer the question in any way. I'll repeat it - why is the fork needed? Try answering it, instead of trolling.

To give you a hint, forks usually happen, if upstream can't accept changes for whatever reason. If you know the reason feel free to explain, instead of coming up with cake analogies.

It's obviously because you need a fork to eat a cake....unless it's an ice cream cake where you'd want a spoon.

[Aryma]

i will affect with stupidity if keep arguing with you guys
wine is good for :
1 photoshop/adobe stuff and others productivity software
2 ms office
3 game
look like wine team don't give priority to this 3 I don't know why they waste time in something else

[pal666]

look like wine team don't give priority to this 3 I don't know why they waste time in something else

did you pay them for any of those 3? (hint: you are paying valve for third one with every steam purchase. now we can talk about stupidity)

[Alexmitter]

i will affect with stupidity if keep arguing with you guys
wine is good for :
1 photoshop/adobe stuff and others productivity software
2 ms office
3 game
look like wine team don't give priority to this 3 I don't know why they waste time in something else

Mainly, Wine is good for running legacy productivity software on Linux, that's mainly why companies pay CodeWeavers for their product.