On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Paul Martz <[email protected]> wrote:
> If your HandlebarNode will be used in many apps to render handlebars (I > don't know, maybe you intend to make a series of bicycle simulators), then > yes, maybe it is best to encapsulate it in its own class. But if you are > just using it as an example of some general hierarchical structure, then I > doubt you want to create a new class for each unique piece of hierarchical > geometry. Perhaps I'm not fully understanding your use case. > My use case was just a fabricated example (and a poor one at that). I'm working on software for mechanical equipment and I was afraid using an example from the actual domain would have been mired down in domain specific terminology. We don't have a particular arrangement of components that would be repeated, but the equipment in general does have a natural hierarchical order to it (A is connected to B is connected to C etc...). I confessed to Jean-Sebastien that the source of this notion of all-in-one nodes was HOOPS - the first scene graph tool I investigated. I'm starting to come around to the OSG viewpoint though. Not that I dislike HOOPS- it's a fantastic piece of software. It's just a little overkill for what we need. -cr
_______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
