Code re-use. [was: Re: Loki...]

["Adam D. Moss" <adam@gimp.org>]

Rob Kaper wrote:
> Yes, libraries are important. I'm doing the same with Atlantik now,
> seperating between a core library with the data objects, a client library
> for the network API and a GUI library which helps visualising the objects.
> It should be easy for someone to write a OpenGL GUI reusing the core and
> network code.

That's good -- frankly this is just standard reasonable software
engineering practice.  It seems as if the time and effort
required to properly architect a game with respect to good
separation of game logic and engine componants is held to be an
unnecessary luxury in the 'real' game development world, but
I can't help but think that creating code with poor modularity
and/or reusability is a very short-sighted approach.  The most
enduring engines -- Quake2/3, Unreal -- have been created with
reusability (specifically, licensing) in mind, and ironically
by companies who *can* afford the luxury of rewriting the
engine every time.

Perhaps more small developers would stay afloat if they had
invested just a touch more time in their first codebase and
hence radically reduced the cost of their second product.

Problem there of course is that many companies don't even
survive until their first product release.  :(

Another interesting avenue is of course just licensing someone
else's engine from the word go.  In my case I'm several
months into the development of our own engine but I'm still
tempted every day by switching to something off-the-shelf.
There are arguments for and against (partly features and
performance, in our case largely the size of up-front investment),
and here I am.  YMMV.

--Adam
-- 
Adam D. Moss    . ,,^^    adam@gimp.org    http://www.foxbox.org/   co:3

But not us (no never) no not us (no never)
We are far too young and clever