On 16/02/2008, Drew Smathers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think a 2D drawing primitives shim library might make sense for a very > simple 2D application - a Logo-like game or something. In such instances, > "optimizing" with display lists would be almost silly, though. > > In other applications, building more complex structures out of the functions > provided by a 2D primitives shim library would almost never be a good idea. > For a structure build out of 10,000 lines, for example, you wind up an > excess 10,000 function calls just for a little API gloss. And (unless your > interfaces are really weird, which would defeat the point), you end up with > 10,000 glBegin/glEnd pairs instead of one - and I don't think display lists > cut out such redundancies. > > There is also very little difficulty in making such abstractions (with the > exception of tessellated polygons, b-splines, etc.), so I personally would > put it in a utils module per application, rather than imposing another > dependency and worry about deployment and potential licensing conflicts.
I disagree entirely. There are plenty of times, particularly when prototyping, when you want to be able to quickly draw a circle, an ellipse, arcs, etc. A library like this would be very useful. If the code is small enough to go in a single .py it would be perfect, you could simply drop it into your project and off you go. So +1 from me. -- Evolution: Taking care of those too stupid to take care of themselves. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pyglet-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
