Carsten Neumann wrote:

> there is no constructor for Matrix that takes 4 Vec4 only one that takes 
> 4 Vec3 (your Vec4 are auto converted to Vec3 to make this work).
> As to why there is no constructor taking 4 Vec4, I don't really know.
> I can add one, but first I'd like to hear if anyone recalls a reason for 
> not having it in the first place ?

I'm guessing that there might be some issues due to the fact that these 
things autoconvert (vec2<->vec3<->vec4), and that if you took vec4's the 
vecs (say vec3s) would be autoupgraded to vec4 with a 0 in the 
w-coordinate, which is not what you want for the fourth part.

But I don't see why that would happen if one has ctors for vec3 _and_ 
vec4's.

Cheers,
/Marcus

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Opensg-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users

Reply via email to