On 9/7/07, Alberto Luaces <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > as seen in the "osghud" example, what is the difference between setting a > Viewer and a slave camera attached to it and creating a CompositeViewer with > two views? At first sight that two solutions seem almost identical...
The end result is the same, set up is similar - Camera set up is the same, its just where you attach the camera which is where the difference lies. So... with lots of commonality what is the difference - one is that conceptual - Viewer can have slaves Cameras that are subsubviant to the Viewer's master Camera, while CompositeViewer instead has a series of View's each one has its own master Camera. Its worth noting that Viewer inherits from View, so "is a" View, while CompositeViewer "has a" list of Views. Now if you think of your hud as an extra View then conceptually CompositeViewer is a far better fit. There is also the functional differences - do you want separate event handling and camera manipulation on your HUD? If so then since these are manage per View then a CompositeViewer is more appropriate. If however the HUD is largely passive then a slave camera in Viewer would be just fine. Finally there are some differences like ancillary support classes only handling Viewer right now, for instance StatsHandler is ties to Viewer. Viewer also handles more sophisticated threading models. Potentially all of this can be ported over to CompositeViewer, and this will be done over time, but as of now CompositeViewer is still the new kid on the block. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
