Commit Graph

8 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
rude 3fe9b2ff16 Reverted module selection feature. This is not really desired.
Users (or lovers) do not get to choose which implementation of
a module they would like to use.

The abstraction is for dealing with portability issues, not
for giving people the ability to choose an alternative
(inferior) backend. The best choice for any platform/situation
should at all times be the *default* for that platform/situation.
If this is not the case; it's a bug (that is easily fixed).

Any module should provide the functionality promised in the docs.
The lover (or user) should not care how, and if [s]he does, [s]he
does still not get to choose.

Also, a related note: duplication of wrapper code is something I
especially wanted to avoid when I first (or should I say ...
"eventually") formed the current architecture.

--HG--
branch : minor
2011-03-26 17:06:05 +01:00
Bart van Strien b4139ffab5 Rename loaders to fit their locations
--HG--
branch : minor
2011-03-13 20:25:35 +01:00
Bill Meltsner fde708160e bringing in the new year by changing every 2010 to 2011 2011-01-15 14:40:27 -06:00
rude aa01c984b9 Updated all dates to 2010. 2010-01-31 16:54:47 +01:00
bart@bartbes.ath.cx 868c2577a7 Added (hopefully) cross-platform love.timer.getMicroTime 2009-11-22 13:19:13 +01:00
rude ba1a75e547 Added many comments, and changed function names for wrapper functions. 2009-08-09 21:08:55 +02:00
rude 8e681b4204 It's now possible to build each module individually (as a DLL). 2009-08-04 19:57:14 +02:00
rude dcb3dfd83d Initial Mercurial commit. 2009-07-26 15:46:49 +02:00