Marcus Lindblom wrote:
> Allen Bierbaum wrote:
>   
>> Marcus Lindblom wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We're discussing switching math-libs for our physics parts here at 
>>> Mentice. The guys seem pretty excited about GMTL (I tipped them off :), 
>>> so I'd like to ask if it's still on the roadmap for OpenSG 2.0?
>>>
>>> Also, I noticed that some the developers of GGT also appear this list, 
>>> so if you guys could comment on it's "liveness" and future, it would be 
>>> appreciated.
>>>   
>>>     
>>>       
>> GMTL is alive and kicking.  It suffers from the fact that is currently 
>> does everything we need and that the features we want to add aren't 
>> needed right away on any of our projects. :)
>>   
>>     
> Good news! Which projects are you using it on currently?
>   
VR Juggler and all the projects we use with VR Juggler.
> Righto. Do you have a roadmap for things you'd like to add, so that we 
> can sync this with what we would like to see, or that we already have 
> and can easily integrate?
>   
I would have to look, but I think most of this is just in our heads 
right now.

>> If there is interest in using it, then we are definitely interested in 
>> helping the effort.  One of the first things I would do is make a 
>> standalone project out of it (outside GGT with it's own trac site, etc).
>>   
>>     
> There might be. The guys here were a bit put off by an error 
> (lineseg<->point, which assumes an infinite line rather than a segment) 
> and were thus a bit worried if an "obvious" error in a simple algorithm 
> slipped through, how proven is the more advanced stuff? Are there any 
> unit-tests written for this or do you test as you go along?
>   
There are quite a few unit tests, so I am surprised that this one fell 
through the cracks.

> I think they can live with a few errors, if they can be fixed. The main 
> worry is liveness and progress (which seems to be just fine. :). If 
> issues are adressed and patches merged continously, I think they will be 
> quite happy.
>   
I think there should not be many errors in algorithms.  The core 
capabilities are unit tested and we have used it on a lot of projects.
> Also, if they choose GMTL (for all physics here), it would be _very_ 
> nice if it was adopted for OpenSG 2.0, since then we have additional 
> leverage to shift to OpenSG for the other platform too.
>
> A trac site would be nice. These guys like Trac. :)
>   
Now I just need time to set it up.

-Allen

> Cheers,
> /Marcus
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Opensg-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users
>
>   


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Opensg-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users

Reply via email to