Hi Robert,
Abstract: I don't necessarily agree, but I do see your point. The reason
I don't agree, is that OSG is pretty much documented by its code. So in
such a case, I would expect the code to auto enforce these rules. If
not, then I would otherwise expect having that information in the
documentation. And I say this in all due respect, as I believe OSG to be
a remarkable library and I do am conscious of all the effort you,
personally, have put into it. I would, though, think that some
documentation improvements, in which I would be glad to participate,
would greatly add to the value of OSG and its usability and its further
acceptance as the main standard for 3D/OpenGL programming. I am planning
to setup myself for collaborating as we (our company) use OSG a lot and
see areas where we could be of some help.
Code: No, no worries, that was in my code. It is the line that was the
source of the error.
Merry Christmas to you!
J-O
Robert Osfield wrote:
Hi Jean-Oliver,
On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Jean-Olivier Racine
<[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks for the quick reply. It is, indeed a node. But if the node was not
intended to be used as-is, shouldn't it be abstract?
Sometimes in C++ you have to be pragmatic about this stuff as forcing
it be abstract causes other issues.
I indeed fixed my problem by replacing:
new osg::Node(node, osg::CopyOp::DEEP_COPY_ALL);
Where was this code? In your app? In one of the OSG plugins?
Robert.
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
