Hi Cedric,
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Cedric Pinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Putting animtk in osg is not a big amount of work. There are only a a few
> lines to rewrite if needed. Tell me if you are agree, and i will
> prepare the code for it.
I'm certainly open to this prospect. I first need to get animtk
compiled up, tested and fully reviewed. I'd also be very useful for
the community to dive and help test the library.
A quick code review there a couple of items that could do with
resolving prior to any merge.
1) I can't spot any export symbols for classes + functions, this
will certainly break the Windows build
2) osgATK is a bit cryptic a name, I'd guess it is means something
osgAnimationToolKit.
Previously I've talked on osg-users about an "mythical"
osgAnimation NodeKit that would be nice to have,
and a reviewing of osgATK suggests that it's no longer mythical,
but something very real ;-)
3) On merge with the OSG I'd have to reformat the source code to fit
in with the core OSG style, items like
four spaces for tabbing, and placing opening { on a newline to
help space out the code to make it easier
to read.
4) Contains even less doxygen comments that the core OSG.
These are all pretty easy to change/fix, an in general the code looks
like it would be very straight forward to merge.
Robert.
Robert.
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
