On Mon 11. March 2002 18:21, you wrote:
> Martin Dressler writes:
> > There are some diferents how the viewer is initialized and from
> > where it take new position. Your viewpoint could be static or
> > change position or (and) up vector in some dependency on FDM or
> > maybe time.
>
> Right, but none of that's the viewer's concern. As long as something
> (probably the view manager) tells each viewer every frame what the
> location(s), orientation(s), and offset(s) are, the viewer doesn't
> have to know anything else -- it can calculate all of its matrices and
> vectors from that.
Hmm I'm more conservative on it.
Yeah you are right about viewer class. It should take two points (to define
point and vector) or point and
vector (camera pos and view dir.) and calculate all of its matrices and
vectors from that.
I suggest initializing and updating of this pair in some class inherited from
viewer class or move viewer class to some new class and make it property of
instance.
Let viewer manager only to build field of this views and swap between them.
Sorry, My English isn't so good to say it correct. IMHO we both thing about
the same and I only suggest keep viewmgr class as simple as possible and do
all work in specialized classes inherited from some fgview class.
fgview class needn't to be the same what we call viewer here.
>
> > IMHO the view also should control if panel, hud or virtual cockpit
> > is used. and if it preserve state if you switch to another view
> > and then return back.
>
> I disagree -- the view code gets *very* hard to understand very
> easily. If that information is tracked, it should be tracked
> externally (the view manager, again?) and not in the viewer code
> itself.
Yes, give this information to some fgview class, cause it belong there.
>
> The viewer code has to do some very complicated matrix and vector
> math, and if we have any hope of being able to maintain the code in
> the future, we need to keep it as simple as possible. The best
> arrangement I can think of is isolating all of the actual view
> transformation code in the viewer class, and all of the
> FlightGear-related stuff in the view manager class. That way, person
> A who knows nothing about matrix math can design new views, etc., and
> person B who knows little about the rest of FlightGear, properties,
> etc. can optimize the matrix math, etc.
Maybe I agree with you but only view manager is something other for me :)
>
>
> All the best,
>
>
> David
Regards,
Madr
--
Martin Dressler
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.musicabona.com/
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
