Rob Loach

Definitely. Was originally thinking since it's outside the implemntation of raylib's core functionality, it does make sense to have it directly in there, since it does make async things work...

Surprised that platform gets messed up. Good find :+1:

There have been some changes in the cmake since 3.5.0, so this is due for an upgrade to raylib 3.7

Is there an example we could port that could demonstrate this? Curious if the variant is copy assigning instead using the model by reference. Also, how does C++ respond to...

Thanks for setting up the sandbox. Tried some of the tests and I see what you mean. Found you could have the map reference pointers to the objects instead of...

By reference works for the `std::map`, but not the `std::variant`. ``` cpp raylib::Model model("assets/models/cube/cube.obj"); std::map map = std::map(); map.insert({"model", model}); ``` Don't have that much experience with `std::variant`. Do you...

Hmm. Using std::variant without copy assignment is well beyond my knowledge. Is there another design you could adopt? Using the objects by reference is probably your best bet here. Maybe...

[emplace_back](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/container/vector/emplace_back) will construct the object directly in the vector. ``` cpp std::vector models; models.emplace_back("assets/models/cube/cube.obj"); ``` I've heard good things of `std::move`, but can't get it to work properly... ``` cpp...

We may need move constructors for all the objects? Perhaps? 🤔 https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/move_constructor

This feels wrong, but might be the approach.... ``` cpp class Texture { Texture(Texture&& old) { id = old.id; width = old.width; height = old.height; mipmaps = old.mipmaps; format =...