Curtis Olson wrote: > 2009/6/23 Mathias Fröhlich > > Well, from my point of view. I would prefer to have these. > The reason is to have something self contained here. > Sure we already rely on osg at many places. But if I build an > aplication on > simgear, I hope to have simgear classes there. SGProperties are simgear > classes, and if you use the property system you may not want to rely > on osg. > > ... also from my past experience switching to an other scenegraph, I > would > prefer to see no osg::.. references at all in flightgear - except > some few > viewer related stuff. But the simulation part of FlightGear should > not need to > know that the viewer runs on osg/OpenGL. > So looking at SimGear as a utility library for simulation > applications, this > make sense from my point of view ... > > So, even if you will need some more glue code, I would prefer to > avoid osg > classes in simgears parts that are not scenegraph related. > The property system is such an area IMO ... > > > This is an interesting point. I also use simgear and the property > system in a variety of other projects, so whatever we do, we shouldn't > make these low level libraries depend on OSG (which isn't available for > instance on my little embedded UAV controller.) OK, but in case you hadn't noticed, libsgmath depends on OSG.
Tim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
