[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [pygame] State of the math branch



Hi,

Casey Duncan wrote:
I agree, I think an iterator api is not flexible enough alone, and if provided, should be in addition to one that takes an arbitrary t.

-Casey

On Nov 14, 2009, at 3:59 PM, Patrick Mullen wrote:

I think there are many cases where one might want, say, the halfway
rotated quat between two, or due to varying framerates with things
like network code, (or even just for animation purposes) you might
want to have varying rates, or skip to a different t value. I don't
see how an iterator would be useful in these cases. You would have to
do a 2 step rotation once to get the midway rotation, iterating an
iterator once is pretty unintuitive; and for varying speeds during a
rotation, you would need to recalculate a new iterator every frame.

I haven't looked at it, but intuitively it seems to be trying to wedge
one concept into a very different one. If there were only one
implementation, I would much prefer the t version.



Yea, Patrick made a great point. the iterator version is only useful
when you draw in fixed time intervals which usually isn't the case.
That's to bad as I was quite fond of the iterator idea.
But well... as it stands I'll probably replace it with a t-version
soon. *sniff*

yours
//Lorenz