I'm just thinking ahead. Actually, it's frustrating. Someone had mentioned earlier about abstracting out your rendering layer from the underlying renderer. I've always had problems with this because underlying J3D layer relies on javax.vecmath alot. Plus, vecmath might be useful for non-rendering apps. Why reinvent the wheel? Also, writing interfaces that wrap these is both tedious and bad for performance.
There should be no legal issues, or J3D should use a free vector library, IMHO. We should lobby this! :-) -DaveS > -----Original Message----- > From: Joerg 'Herkules' Plewe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 2:04 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [JAVA3D] vecmath.jar? > > > Legal issues aside... > > As long as you deliver vecmath.jar itself or package it into > you jar, sure! > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Smith, David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 7:53 PM > Subject: [JAVA3D] vecmath.jar? > > > Can vecmath.jar be used in an app without Java3D? > Meaning, if I create an app that uses javax.vecmath.*, > will someone without Java3D installed be able to run > that app? > > ============================================================== > ============= > 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". > ==========================================================================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".
