[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] Documentation Project

From: Philippe C . D . Robert
Subject: Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] Documentation Project
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 18:27:22 +0200

On Friday, October 11, 2002, at 06:08  Uhr, Brent Gulanowski wrote:
On Friday, October 11, 2002, at 01:38  AM, Philippe C.D. Robert wrote:

this is maybe a very good idea. To finally make some progress again, I planned to upload all header files to the CVS (including empty implementations maybe) so that you see my ideas. I would then fill in the code which would come from 0.3 ASAP. But unfortunately there are still some issues with the design which are not yet finalised, ie the new camera design to name one.

I hesitate taking the old 0.3.x tree, adding the new files as is to let everyone working on it, because I think this would turn out to be a little messy - I'd rather have a simple version to start with (that is no graph optimisation, GL optimisations etc.), so that the design is understandable by anyone and that design flaws are detected early!

What do you think?

If the design is significantly different, then this makes perfect sense to me. It doesn't mean that you're throwing out existing work, but that old code will have to be inspected carefully as it is deemed appropriate and added in. I believe it is ideal to start with the external headers for any project, whether you are a top-down design-first person (like me) or an XP person. I may change my tune after a few years, but it seems to me that for a library, you usually have some idea how it is going to be used first, so creating the API that is exposed first will get you thinking in terms of the services being offered and how best to represent them, instead of worrying about how they are implemented.

It is not significantly different per se, but some (central) parts are, so I guess I will do so...

BTW, did any of my speculations of the graph organization have an applicable value?

I am not sure if I understood it completely... I agree that we should try to keep the design/class hierarchy simple (make it even simpler as it is now) and use the features of ObjC whenever possible. But on the other side, rendering performance must never be neglected! So what I did is I redesigned the graph traversal code to be more flexible and extensible w/o affecting the final performance. Please review this part of the new design as soon as I have uploaded the stuff and let me know what you think!

Philippe C.D. Robert

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]