Hi Sukender, On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Sukender <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you for reviweing such a submission...
I now believe the right thing to do would be to break the submission into separate parts so that each set of new features are checked in separately. This will make it easier to trace changes and any regressions, as well as make it possible for me to merge the less controversial changes faster. Could you break the submission up into parts based on functionality for me? > Well, about UTF8, I guess those have same encoding as filenames: > - nodes names (some readers put the full path as node name for the root) > - geometries (and RigGeometries and MorphGeometries) > - animations and channels names > > Of course, this is only my feeling, and you may disagree. > If so, may I suggest to turn the proprocessor test into a standard "if()" > testing a readerwriter option? We could have daeGeometriesNamesUseCodepage / > daeAnimationsNamesUseCodepage, or such. However, if the same is possible with > node names, I suggest to interpret node names the same way we do for > filenames. > > Thoughts? This isn't quite the specific question about the code that I asked.... but asking wider questions... Personally I don't have an experience with UTF8. Pushing changes from filenames down on to general OSG names is a much wider issue that we can't deal with prior to 3.0 release. As a general note, I really dislike having #ifdef code paths in the OSG codebase as it'll make the code much less maintainable and more error prone. If we can do stuff at runtime then this is a better way of doing it. Robert. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-submissions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org
