[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:
Hi,
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!
-Phil
--
Philippe C.D. Robert
http://www.nice.ch/~phip
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] 3D file formats, Philippe C . D . Robert, 2002/10/03
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] 3D file formats, Brent Gulanowski, 2002/10/03
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] 3D file formats, Philippe C . D . Robert, 2002/10/07
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] 3D file formats, Brent Gulanowski, 2002/10/07
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] 3D file formats, Matt Brandt, 2002/10/07
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] 3D file formats, Brent Gulanowski, 2002/10/08
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] 3D file formats, Philippe C . D . Robert, 2002/10/10
- [Gnu3dkit-dev] Documentation Project, Matt Brandt, 2002/10/10
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] Documentation Project, Philippe C . D . Robert, 2002/10/11
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] Documentation Project, Brent Gulanowski, 2002/10/11
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] Documentation Project,
Philippe C . D . Robert <=
- [Gnu3dkit-dev] General goals and strategies?, Brent Gulanowski, 2002/10/14
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] 3D file formats, Brent Gulanowski, 2002/10/11
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] 3D file formats, Philippe C . D . Robert, 2002/10/11
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] 3D file formats, Philippe C . D . Robert, 2002/10/09
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-dev] 3D file formats, Philippe C . D . Robert, 2002/10/09