Skip to content

Small updates for pygame comparison #1827

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 23, 2024
Merged

Small updates for pygame comparison #1827

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 23, 2024

Conversation

Starbuck5
Copy link
Contributor

Hello! I was happy to see pygame-ce had been added to this comparison page, it spurred me to do a few small updates. Hopefully these are agreeable.

  • added pygame-ce examples link like pygame
  • pygame and pygame-ce are type hinted and have been for a while. Perhaps this is an artifact from before this was the case?
  • pygame-ce supports many different kinds of transparency. If you load an image that has transparency it will have transparency. Pygame and pygame-ce support colorkeying too, but we also support per pixel alpha and global alpha for a surface.
  • I rewrote note 1 a bit, spurred by "write the image to a surface." Any loaded image is already a Surface, there's no write operation needed. And you don't need to make a Sprite out of a surface to use it, and even if you did that's not an expensive operation in pygame so it's strange to mention.
  • Also the links at the bottom were unused as far as I could tell so I removed them

@einarf
Copy link
Member

einarf commented Feb 22, 2024

Any updates on this one?

@Starbuck5
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'd like to get it merged :)

@pvcraven pvcraven merged commit 6aa5341 into pythonarcade:development Feb 23, 2024
@Starbuck5 Starbuck5 deleted the update-comparison branch March 16, 2024 08:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants