Hi Robert,
Robert Osfield wrote: > > When I talk about high level encapsulation I mean that it wrap > existing OSG features that would normally use a combination of > Camera's and shaders. While this might use and be compatible with > existing core features, conceptually the encapsulation take quite a > different take to that of the way one would take using core features. > Of course, but is this not a way how every NodeKit is done? It encapsulate osg's functionality to provide classes with new features. osgPPU do exactly the same. The only one class you maybe not like is the osgPPU::ShaderAttribute (note osgPPU::Shader is deprecated and will be removed soon) class, which provides just more than an osg::Program. However users are not asked to use it, they still can go with simple osg::Program, osg::Shader and osg::Uniform if they like that. There are no more additional classes which might somehow replace core osg functionality, I think. > > There are certain parts of the code, it's the concepts about how one > should put together this type of functionality, the core OSG has have > good continuity of concepts and granularity of class design. If we > have too many different approaches mixing in together lots of issues > will arise in trying to convey when one should use one approach or > another. I do not see why osgPPU shadows one of the existing approaches from the main osg core. I think there is currently no class/nodekit in the main core which offeres the functionality of osgPPU. In my opinion, the library is completly orthogonal to the main core and it's nodekits. cheers art ------------------ Read this topic online here: http://osgforum.tevs.eu/viewtopic.php?p=4992#4992 _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
