With all the major stuff you've done for sculpt, what I meant was "if anyone can tackle a tough problem, it's you." Sorry for being unclear!
So for instance the 3D view, would you issue one call like "3D view, draw thyself", then composite widgets & overlays on top of that based on a script? Or does it go deeper into how the 3D view is actually drawn? Or am I missing the point entirely? Mike Erwin musician, naturalist, pixel pusher, hacker extraordinaire On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Jason Wilkins <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Michael Fox <[email protected]> wrote: >> Oh yes it is more then a mess, its a nightmare, I am trying to add view >> tessellation option to the view port, and im having one hell of a hard >> time. we defiantly need an cleaning out > > I'm curious what you are trying to do. > > To answer Mike's question about if I can handle this, yes, I am rather > confident. The fancy view port could be written along side the > existing one where it can grow features until it replaces the old one. > That is also good for A-B switching. > > Although I want to emphasis generality and programmability, which are > sometimes evil tar-pits, I can start with a very domain specific set > of pieces and replace those with more general pieces as time allows. > > In other words, as long as I don't try to jump straight to absolute > best implementation right away I'll be fine. I think this is > something that can be made to approach "perfection" over multiple > iterations instead of something I get stuck in over my head. > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
