Hi Julien, Thanks for the changes. I have just done a first pass review which has given me lots to think about.
One alternative to the approach you have taken is to put the supported versions into the wrapper object rather than in the associates list. The advantage of this is that it would minimize the changes to wrappers and to osgDB, the disadvantage would be that you'd loose the fine grained control over when an associate is included in the list. Currently I don't have a strong opinion on which route is better. Thoughts? Robert. On 1 June 2016 at 17:49, Julien Valentin <[email protected]> wrote: > Oups there was an error in my previous post attachment:/ > I updated it on the forum but for the mailing list I reattach it in a new > post. > Sorry > > mp3butcher wrote: >> Concerning osgDB retro compatibility of associates, I came out with something >> seed attached for details. >> For example for the purpose of osg::BufferData serialzation: >> { >> UPDATE_TO_VERSION_SCOPED( 143 ) >> ADDED_ASSOCIATE("osg::BufferData") >> } >> The only problem is iit has to be repeated in all BufferData Subclasses >> I've not tested it yet but it seams ok > > > ------------------ > Read this topic online here: > http://forum.openscenegraph.org/viewtopic.php?p=67327#67327 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > osg-submissions mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org > _______________________________________________ osg-submissions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org
