Hi Robert, At first sight, I think "Array::s/getNormalize()" and "Array::s/getMaintainDataType()" are really good ideas.
But sometimes (in very specific situation) one could want to use the same osg::Array with different parameters for different geometries, so in this case the "Array::s/getNormalize()" and "Array::s/getMaintainDataType()" should become "Geometry::ArrayData::s/getNormalize()" and "Geometry::ArrayData::s/getMaintainDataType()". And I think this also could lead to mixing different concepts : until now - I'm thinking about the osg::Array class as a "CPU data container" and nothing more : there is no "hard link" betweeen osg::Array and openGL API. - I'm thinking about the osg::Geometry::ArrayData as a "CPU data container OpengL binding" : there is no management of CPU data here, only the binding of these data to the openGL device. Thank you! Cheers, Aurelien ------------------ Read this topic online here: http://forum.openscenegraph.org/viewtopic.php?p=54380#54380 _______________________________________________ osg-submissions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org
