[ut2003io] optimized openal.so = more speed

Felix Maibaum f.maibaum at web.de
Fri Oct 11 04:37:05 EDT 2002

So have you tried gcc3 at all? for all I've heard it should be quite stable by 

back to openal:
since I don't know who else to ask: how good is hardware acceleration support 
in openal anyway? I mean my SBLive! should be able to mix those 32 or 
something channels in hardware without a problem. Why doesn't OpenAL just let 
it do that?


Am Donnerstag, 10. Oktober 2002 21:42 schrieb Ryan C. Gordon:
> > What do you base this on? For Hyperspace Delivery Boy I HAD to use gcc
> > 3.2 because I ran into odd compiler bugs when using 2.95.3. I was
> > surprised by that but it's a fact - one certain bug disappeared with
> > gcc 3.2.
> YMMV. If it compiles all of Red Hat's distro correctly and misgenerates
> one opcode in ut2003, then I don't particularly care how robust it is,
> generally speaking.
> (To be fair, I had to be dragged kicking and screaming to 2.95.3 from
> 2.95.2...ut2003 exposed a template bug in 2.95.2)
> --ryan.

More information about the ut2003 mailing list