Florin Herinean wrote:
Rob,
Well, right now there are two versions of java3d, totaly incompatible at the level of implementation. When installing java3d, the user *must* choose
I think that my point was that the *API* of Java3D is currently independent of the use of OpenGL or Direct3D. Your suggestion of changing Canvas3D to extend GLCanvas wouldn't hang together for Direct3D unless the API got 'split', which seems like a very bad idea.
between java3d ogl and java3d directx. That means that it is feasible to have jogl support *only* in java3d ogl.
Then the jogl ideea is to have a super lightweight api on top of opengl. To achieve that, there is a "translator" machine who build the whole jogl from the headers of opengl (that's what one of the jogl development members have disclosed in a forum discussion). That way, it is easy to be up-to-date with
Yep. I've built JOGL on Solaris, and that's what it does. It uses something called 'antlr' to parse the headers etc.
Rob
your api. Extending that ideea, it is possible to create another "translator" to build, for example, jd3d :-) which will be a super lightweight api on top of direct3d, which can be shipped *only* with java3d for directx. Hmmm, that sounds pretty much like the microsoft ideea of java vm.
Besides that, with a little effort, somebody can put java3d as a high level api on top of jogl/jd3d. You only have to change the native methods present in various java3d classes to calls for jogl/jd3d. Eventually, there might be a sort of "adapter" so that you can put java3d on top of any 3d api, of course if you provide the corresponding pluggable adapter. That way, java3d will be a real high-level api.
Cheers,
Florin
-----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- Von: Rob Nugent [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 19. Juni 2003 14:58 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Re: [JAVA3D] AW: [JAVA3D] Stress testing and 'buildGA' cost.
Florin,
Florin Herinean wrote:
Hi Rob,
You know that I've played with GL4java, which is pretty much like jogl. My experience was terrible. Apart from good performance, the lack of a high level API stopped me to continue in that direction. Of course, if java3d will be dropped, then I'll have to go over to jogl, but I do hope that java3d will remain on the market, since at the moment is the only high
level
3d api present. The ideea of rewritting again all the functionality
already
present in java3d in order to move to jogl is quite annoying for me. I really like java3d and the way it is structured.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. There is lots of value-add in Java3D which it would appall me to have to implement for myself. Additionally, it's an api for Java programmers with a reasonable OO structure, which JOGL definitely is not. The reasons I'm looking at JOGL are the following:
*) Opportunity to eliminate GC issues with picking in Java3D (My old hobby-horse) *) Ability to control these display list building issues. *) Access to the stencil buffer.
I think it unlikely that the cost-benefit equation for me would involve me moving to JOGL though - this is only my 'lunch-time' project after all.
It would be absolutely great to have jogl as a subpart of java3d immediate mode api. For example, even in jogl you need a canvas on which you want to draw, the GLCanvas. Why not make it that GLCanvas to be the Canvas3D ?
They
do have similar functionality. Or even better, Canvas3D to extend GLCanvas
!
Then you only need to expose from the Canvas3D the methods getGL() and getGLU() and voila! java3d is cooperating with jogl. Those who wants
higher
level can use the normal java3d api, those who wants to use low level functions can use the jogl api. And most important, you can mix them !
I hope that somebody responsible will read my suggestions and think seriously about them. What seemed to be impossible with java3d and GL4java now looks very *possible*, since both jogl and java3d sit under the same umbrella.
Of course, the trouble with this is that it would not fit well with the Direct3D version Java3D. In general (stencil buffer aside), I'm happy with the capabilites of Java3D, what I'd like is more ways to tweak its run-time behaviour.
Oh well, back to transaction processing... <context switch here>
Rob
With Best Regards,
Florin Herinean
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
--
Rob Nugent Sun Microsystems, Southampton, UK
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +44 (0) 1489 585503 Fax: +44 (0) 1489 881363
=========================================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
