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

Re: OpenGL scenegraph

On 05-Sep-99 Jan Ekholm wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Sep 1999, Steve Baker wrote:
>>Jan Ekholm wrote:
>>> So, I ended up
>>> creating an own simple scenegraph on top of OpenGL. It is very
>>> lightweight, easy to use and still somewhat limited in functionality,
>>> maybe even buggy. It however worked fine for displaying the proteins I
>>> needed it for...
>>It sounds a lot like 'ssg' (SimpleSceneGraph) - which I maintain as a
>>part of PLIB  http://www.woodsoup.org/projs/plib
> Yep, I know! I ended up writing my package as a result of not finding
> anything which would implement a good scene graph a year and a half ago. I
> think I could have gone with 'ssg' then, as it's open and it works, but I
> didn't know about it.
>>> Now I wonder if someone is interested in using such a beast,
>>About 300 people are signed up to the PLIB users list and 150 or so to
>>the developers list - so there is certainly interest in such things.
> Sounds interesting. :-) But my humble effort is still to a large extent
> not thoroughly tested nor fully implemented. One good thing I think can be
> worth mentioning is that it does not force anybody to use any kind of
> toolkit, it works everywhere where there's a window which would accept
> plain OpenGL, e.g. glut, the Qt QGL widget and probably the Gtk equivalent
> (name?), as well as the Motif GLRenderArea.

gtkglarea is the gtk one. Being independant of a toolkit is a good thing, I
think, it allows a lot of modularity. It can be slurped up into another toolkit
or 5, used independant, etc

>>I refer you back to the long thread (that just wound down) about why
>>there are so many near-identical packages out there - and why you can
>>never get someone (like me) to give up my package to work on yours (or
>>vice versa).
> Multiple packages are IMHO a good thing. Evolution will most likely let
> the best and strongest survive (although not in Kansas). Basically I don't

hehehehe :)

> really care that much if my package lands belly up, as I do this for the
> fun of it, and most of the development was paid anyway. Had I done it all
> for 'free' I think I'd have a much stronger emotional attachment to my
> code (as with my networking lib Zombie).

even if code lands belly up, it was fun to do and you learned from it. That's
the important stuff. I know I code for fun and to learn, which probably
explains my resistance to the concept of using an sdk for everything :)

> Btw Steve, thanks for the nice docs on OpenGL you have on your site. I've
> been reading a couple of them while trying to figure out how to properly
> combine several rotations into one single rotation in order to avoid some
> weird effects. Still struggling, so I had to write a Matrix class to try
> out the theories in practise... :-)

quaternions give me wood

> ---------------------+------------------------------------------------------
>  Jan 'Chakie' Ekholm |    CS at Åbo Akademi University, Turku, Finland
>     Linux Inside     | I'm the blue screen of death, no-one hears you scream

        -Erik <br0ke@math.smsu.edu> [http://shells.clipboard.com/~br0ke]

The opinions expressed by me are not necessarily opinions. In all
probability, they are random rambling, and to be ignored. Failure to ignore
may result in severe boredom or confusion. Shake well before opening. Keep