I'm not suggesting it happen, just that if anyone is interested I can give them moral support ;)
For the sake of argument, however, the advantage of template vector and matrix classes is that where any operations can be evaluated during compile time, will be (assuming that the operations are coded using template metaprogramming techniques). This would result in less work for the CPU during run-time. One thing I would like to see is, where possible, taking advantage of SSE(2/3) instructions on CPU's that have them. I imagine that there could be some speed up, especially if operations could be batched (I'm sure a whole other can-o-worms). Anyway, for what it's worth. -B -----Original Message----- From: osg-users-boun...@lists.openscenegraph.org [mailto:osg-users-boun...@lists.openscenegraph.org] On Behalf Of Robert Osfield Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 11:36 AM To: OpenSceneGraph Users Subject: Re: [osg-users] Why is Vec not a template? Hi Brad, On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Brad Colbert <bcolb...@rscusa.com> wrote: > A templated Vec class isn't all that hard to implement and maintain, it's > pretty straight forward. There are awkward, and making it templated is totally pointless. What is there to gain? > What's a pain is a templated Matrix class, although totally doable (from > experience). I would gladly help if someone wanted to start taking on the > task. I'm not about to merge code that offers no advancement in features, performance or maintainability. There are plenty of things the community can help out with, stuff that doesn't advance the OSG is a step backwards. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
