Mach-Engine over Raylib

For a few days, i was discovering game development, and found about Mach engine. Lets do a v/s: the Mach engine (Game Engine) and Raylib(Graphics Library - because why not). While both have their merits, I'll explain why Mach might be the superior choice for your next project, especially if you're working with the Zig programming language.

Mach Engine vs Raylib

Mach is a "game engine" and graphics framework written in Zig inspired by some modern and Advanced engines like Bevy and Our Machinery. It's claims to be fast, modular, and easy to integrate with existing Zig projects (says their website). Whereas, Raylib (written in C) and has bindings support for many languages, including Zig. Obviously, there's no comparision between both of these frameworks/libraries because it is more like an engine than a library.

Why Choose Mach?

[!tldr] It is way better to use for zig based projects due to its "native" environment.

1. Native Zig Integration Example: Creating a window in Mach:

     const std = @import("std");
     const mach = @import("mach");
   
     pub fn main() !void {
         try mach.Core.init(.{
             .title = "Mach Example",
             .width = 800,
             .height = 600,
         });
         defer mach.Core.deinit();
   
         while (mach.Core.open) {
             mach.Core.pollEvents();
             try mach.Core.update();
         }
     }
   

2. Performance wise it feels like the design idea for this engine was well formulated, which shows with its performance. By utilizing Zig's compile-time features and low-level control, Mach can achieve excellent performance without sacrificing developer productivity.

3. Modular Design: It's has way more architecture (than raylib) which allows you to use only the components you need, keeping project lean + efficient. Particularly beneficial for smaller games or when targeting platforms with limited resources, With this it targets Advanced use cases - they are goated.

4. Modern Graphics API Support: It supports modern graphics APIs like Vulkan, Metal, and DirectX 12 through its GPU abstraction layer. This means you can write code once and target multiple platforms without worrying about the underlying graphics API.

Here's a simple example of drawing a triangle using Mach's GPU API:

  const std = @import("std");
  const mach = @import("mach");
  const gpu = mach.gpu;

  pub fn main() !void {
      // ... window initialization code ...

      const vertex_shader = @embedFile("shaders/vertex.wgsl");
      const fragment_shader = @embedFile("shaders/fragment.wgsl");

      const pipeline = try gpu.RenderPipeline.init(.{
          .vertex = .{
              .module = gpu.createShaderModule(.{ .code = vertex_shader }),
              .entry_point = "main",
          },
          .fragment = .{
              .module = gpu.createShaderModule(.{ .code = fragment_shader }),
              .entry_point = "main",
              .targets = &[_]gpu.ColorTargetState{.{
                  .format = gpu.TextureFormat.bgra8_unorm,
              }},
          },
          .primitive_topology = .triangle_list,
      });
      defer pipeline.deinit();

      while (mach.Core.open) {
          // ... rendering code ...
      }
  }

5. Community Support: Its not that great obviously (raylibs has better community support), but it is actively developed and has a growing community of contributors. This means you can expect regular updates, bug fixes, and new features as the engine evolves.

When Might You Choose Raylib?

While Mach offers numerous advantages, there are scenarios where Raylib might be a better fit:

1. Language Flexibility: If you're not committed to Zig and want to use the same library across multiple languages, Raylib's wide range of language bindings could be beneficial.
2. Simplicity for Beginners: Raylib's straightforward API can be easier for absolute beginners to grasp, especially those new to game development.
3. Established Ecosystem: Raylib has been around longer and has a more extensive collection of examples and learning resources.

Conclusion

Mach is pretty sweet and it's syntax feels more home to me(reason why i picked it over raylib), it's inspired by modern and Advanced engines like Bevy and Our Machinery. I'd recommend (a gaming engine) using Mach to a raylib user - if you want to make more performant games, you know? its fast, modern design, Plus, it's ready for all the latest graphics stuff. But honestly, it really comes down to what you're trying to make and what you and your team are comfortable with. Why not play around with both and see which one feels better?