4.7 KiB
stb
single-file public domain libraries for C/C++
| library | lastest version | category | description |
|---|---|---|---|
| stb_vorbis.c | 1.04 | audio | decode ogg vorbis files from file/memory to float/16-bit signed output |
| stb_image.h | 2.02 | graphics | image loading/decoding from file/memory: JPG, PNG, TGA, BMP, PSD, GIF, HDR, PIC |
| stb_truetype.h | 1.02 | graphics | parse, decode, and rasterize characters from truetype fonts |
| stb_image_write.h | 0.97 | graphics | image writing to disk: PNG, TGA, BMP |
| stb_image_resize.h | 0.90 | graphics | resize images larger/smaller with good quality |
| stb_rect_pack.h | 0.05 | graphics | simple 2D rectangle packer with decent quality |
| stretchy_buffer.h | 1.01 | utility | typesafe dynamic array for C (i.e. approximation to vector<>), doesn't compile as C++ |
| stb_textedit.h | 1.5 | UI | guts of a text editor for games etc implementing them from scratch |
| stb_dxt.h | 1.04 | 3D graphics | Fabian "ryg" Giesen's real-time DXT compressor |
| stb_perlin.h | 0.2 | 3D graphics | revised Perlin noise (3D input, 1D output) |
| stb_easy_font.h | 0.5 | 3D graphics | quick-and-dirty easy-to-deploy bitmap font for printing frame rate, etc |
| stb_tilemap_editor.h | 0.30 | game development | embeddable tilemap editor |
| stb_herringbone_wang_tile.h | 0.6 | game development | herringbone Wang tile map generator |
| stb_c_lexer.h | 0.06 | parsing | simplify writing parsers for C-like languages |
| stb_divide.h | 0.91 | math | more useful 32-bit modulus e.g. "euclidean divide" |
| stb.h | 2.24 | misc | helper functions for C, mostly redundant in C++; basically author's personal stuff |
| stb_leakcheck.h | 0.1 | misc | quick-and-dirty malloc/free leak-checking |
FAQ
What's the license?
These libraries are in the public domain (or the equivalent where that is not possible). You can do anything you want with them. You have no legal obligation to do anything else, although I appreciate attribution.
If I wrap an stb library in a new library, does the new library have to be public domain?
No.
A lot of these libraries seem redundant to existing open source libraries. Are they better somehow?
Generally they're only better in that they're easier to integrate, easier to use, and easier to release (single file; good API; no attribution requirement). They may be less featureful, slower, and/or use more memory. If you're already using an equivalent library, there's probably no good reason to switch.
Why single-file headers?
Windows doesn't have standard directories where libraries live. That makes deploying libraries in Windows a lot more painful than open source developers on Unix-derivates generally realize. (It also makes library dependencies a lot worse in Windows.)
Making them a single file makes it very easy to just drop them into a project that needs them. (Of course you can still put them in a proper shared library tree if you want.)
The difference between 10 files and 9 files is not a big deal, but the difference between 2 files and 1 file is a big deal.
Why "stb"? Is this something to do with Set-Top Boxes?
No, they are just the initials for my name, Sean T. Barrett. This was not chosen out of egomania, but as a semi-robust way of namespacing the filenames and source function names.
Will you add more image types to stb_image.c?
If people submit them, I generally add them, but the goal of stb_image is less for applications like image viewer apps (which need to support every type of image under the sun) and more for things like games which can choose what images to use, so I may decline to add them if they're too rare or if the size of implementation vs. apparent benefit is too low.
Are there other single-file public-domain libraries out there?
Yes. I'll put a list here when people remind me what they are.
Do you have any advice on how to create my own single-file library?
Yes. https://github.com/nothings/stb/blob/master/docs/stb_howto.txt
Why public domain?
Because more people will use it. Because it's not viral, people are not obligated to give back, so you could argue that it hurts the development of it, and then because it doesn't develop as well it's not as good, and then because it's not as good, in the long run maybe fewer people will use it. I have total respect for that opinion, but I just don't believe it myself for most software.
Why C?
Primarily, because I use C, not C++. But it does also make it easier for other people to use them from other languages.
Why not C99? stdint.h, declare-anywhere, etc.
I still use MSVC 6 (1998) as my IDE because it has better human factors for me than later versions of MSVC.