Are you sure about its simplicity? Do you know how much I engaged in even for a simple flood fill algorithm, how long it took to make the text area with multiple line work properly. It is easy to add a simple window without worriying about inner working of layers, activeness of GUI objects with any high level API but doing all GUI stuff from the scratch is not that much simple task.For correct pixels mouse over to be processed, it is essential to take into account the positions of sliders and degree of zoom.Providing possibility to select an area for duplicating, deleting, moving, scaling and rotating is another story. Writing a font library that includes methods from loading of fonts up to specifying the presentation style of the text is not as simple as you think.I wrote a library even for string operations which doesn't involves just conventional functions but provides a rich method collection of encryption which might have a potential use for creating various file structure with its a solid infrastructure.Maybe, It seems that all these work is a bit complex, hard and a serious challenge to me because I am a newbie in this field of graphic programming.
I dealed with 3D Model Creator too, and it was not so much trying except texture mapping, light mapping and organizing the 3D interface to edit surfaces, triangles, lines and points rather than writing algorithms for basic shapes or functions such as ellipsoid, surface shifting/rotating or writing a an OBJ loader in order to use external models in program.(I doubt the last sentence is suitable to context because the sentence is long and it doesn't sound good even though it is logically correct :) Sorry for my possible poor English. I may be a little idiot. )

I don't mean to be harsh but you spent time making the inside great but the outside is the opposite.
As shippou said, it's simple, not interesting though.

Not simple for you, but simple for us. You essentially reinvented everything that already exist. What does your tool offer that others don't?

And the design (the GUI, the look etc) is simple.

I love reinventing everything from zero, but I know it's not any interesting to others. I only showed my stuff to people when I felt my stuff can do some things other software can't.

Not simple for you, but simple for us. You essentially reinvented everything that already exist. What does your tool offer that others don't?

And the design (the GUI, the look etc) is simple.

I love reinventing everything from zero, but I know it's not any interesting to others. I only showed my stuff to people when I felt my stuff can do some things other software can't.

I had to make the one that was already made before I propose new and better solutions to the same problem or find innovative ways of building new features.Yes, the end result is not a big project yet in spite of the effort for low level stuff even for simple things that look easy from outside but I can't say that it is not something that can't be appreciated. It is also interesting that a lot of person starting coding for low level stuff first are encouraged here but although I dealed with so much to present some work, no one supported and even discouraged just because I didn't offer something new or I didn't show colorful game graphics yet. Whether or not this place is full of expert graphics programmers, this is not my guilt, doesn't justify what the members do and I didn't find ethical behavior of some members.It can not be denied that even they started this job from the scratch like me so I would expect more friendly responds.

You didn't get the point. It's awesome what you have achieved, and most of us perfectly know the amount of work that goes into projects like this (and that not everybody is able to make stuff like that), but we only see the end product, which is just another toy/learning/my-first paint program. We didn't even get to see the engineering and architecture behind it.

The point: Just don't expect any praise or comment on it.

Plus we are simple minded people here. You haven't explicitly said anywhere that you want feedback about the usability, or whatever of your paint program, which was only included in the last paragraph. The only comment I can think of the post it "it was a good read"

As it was already mentioned, this thread and your first post fits into the journal section.

I think a better measure of how many people tried it is to look at the download logs. Only a small fraction of people will leave any kind of comment (whether praise, criticism, whatever) - and number of comments isn't really a good measure of interest anyway (people might have found the post interest, but have nothing to say - also note that on the lounge, unlike other forums or your own journal, it isn't possible to vote up a post).

Whilst gamedev might seem a good place to get feedback, though it's not always clear what feedback people are after, especially if there are no specific questions. It's not clear what feedback you want - e.g., how it looks as a game engine, how good a paint editor it is, or whether it's worthwhile as a learning experience, or suggestions for improvements etc?

Writing a GUI library from scratch is quite a bit of work, so impressive in that sense. Though I'm not sure what benefit there is in using this for tools - unless you need an in-game GUI, you'd do better to write any required tools using standard GUI toolkits.

You didn't get the point. It's awesome what you have achieved, and most of us perfectly know the amount of work that goes into projects like this (and that not everybody is able to make stuff like that), but we only see the end product, which is just another toy/learning/my-first paint program. We didn't even get to see the engineering and architecture behind it.

The point: Just don't expect any praise or comment on it.

Plus we are simple minded people here. You haven't explicitly said anywhere that you want feedback about the usability, or whatever of your paint program, which was only included in the last paragraph. The only comment I can think of the post it "it was a good read"

As it was already mentioned, this thread and your first post fits into the journal section.

I already didn't expect praise but comments related to the topic.It was enough for some people to try the program and say somethings about it.Maybe, I should have also mentioned what I like as you said.I will take into consideration what you said about journal section too.Thanks for the comment.

I think a better measure of how many people tried it is to look at the download logs. Only a small fraction of people will leave any kind of comment (whether praise, criticism, whatever) - and number of comments isn't really a good measure of interest anyway (people might have found the post interest, but have nothing to say - also note that on the lounge, unlike other forums or your own journal, it isn't possible to vote up a post).

Whilst gamedev might seem a good place to get feedback, though it's not always clear what feedback people are after, especially if there are no specific questions. It's not clear what feedback you want - e.g., how it looks as a game engine, how good a paint editor it is, or whether it's worthwhile as a learning experience, or suggestions for improvements etc?

Writing a GUI library from scratch is quite a bit of work, so impressive in that sense. Though I'm not sure what benefit there is in using this for tools - unless you need an in-game GUI, you'd do better to write any required tools using standard GUI toolkits.

"It's not clear what feedback you want - e.g., <<how it looks as a game engine, how good a paint editor it is, or whether it's worthwhile as a learning experience, or suggestions for improvements>> etc" yes, almost the same(as <<...>>) not more.As I mentioned above, I could write what I expect from reader.It is probably my mistake.

As for the GUI, It is for more flexible visual applications, which I will also add bigger components to make easier the building process, for creating new kinds of interface helping interaction between user and application, including 3D, visual design and real-time editing techniques.So I had to do this job graphically.But these are draft yet.The reason why I have to stimulate already existing systems before I can implement these is to get used to the concept. Thanks for this comment, too

Many graphics cards Intel cards specifically do not have the same level of OpenGL compatibility as Direct X .

Fixed.

Intel is a pretty particular case. For everything else, if you bought an AMD/nVidia card in the last 7 years (ie, G80, R600 and above), you probably have OpenGL 3 support. And going with the OpenGL 2 + extensions route is its own roulette game in itself.

OpenGL 3.2 core profile (3.3 if you don't care for some OSX users) should get you pretty much to every place that matters.

Intel is a pretty particular case. For everything else, if you bought an AMD/nVidia card in the last 7 years (ie, G80, R600 and above), you probably have OpenGL 3 support. And going with the OpenGL 2 + extensions route is its own roulette game in itself.

OpenGL 3.2 core profile (3.3 if you don't care for some OSX users) should get you pretty much to every place that matters.

.

Assuming everyone has a specific version can lead to issues after release.

Assuming every one owns those 2 brands of cards can lead to issues after release.

I'm reading an article here about how the graphics rendering decisions on a game named Cloning Clyde let to over 12% of users reporting the game crashing before it starts. They patched some of the mess, but I am still seeing "game will not start" as the most common bug report, even with non Intel cards.

Even though most folks don't care about "the small percentage" - it is not that hard to detect which version some one is using, and default your rendering engine depending on the result.