Kevin Glass wrote:
I still can't see why anyone would go for a native binding unless they
have a desperate need for speed or fancy features. In those cases, why not
use C++?
Its more a problem of reaching the end of the Java3D API and wanting
more. Ie Xj3D is now ready to tackle pixel and vertex shaders, but we
can't. Our only choice right now is to wait for 1.4 or write our own
scenegraph layer for Java which exposes more of the lower level
functionality or go directly to opengl bindings. Either way it means
writing a bunch of stuff that's already written in Java3D. There is no
need to goto C++, just expose more of the graphics cards features for
advanced users. Java3D works very nicely as a basic graphics API, it
has taken us very far into supporting VRML and X3D.
I think we need to structure a way that the community can help Sun push
Java3D forward. One path forward is to open source Java3D and let the
community help improve it. This might also sidestep the issue of
porting Java3D to MAC, let the community do it, no lawyers/CEO's involved.
--
Alan Hudson
President: Yumetech, Inc. http://www.yumetech.com/
Web3D Open Source Chair http://www.web3d.org/TaskGroups/source/
===========================================================================
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".
