On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Lunpa <[email protected]> wrote: > (more on topic) > In either case, I'm doubtful that it would be possible to run pyglet > without lots of modification. In the former case, differences between webgl > (which is based on opengl es2, and depreciates fixed functionality stuff, > stuff pyglet might still use) and the ctypes based api that pyglet uses to > make opengl calls. Similarly, ctypes calls are problematic again in jython. >
It is a direction we should already be going with pyglet - fixed function is dead, deader than a doornail. Moving to a webgl/es2.0 model would also open the door to Android/iPhone support... Also, while skulpt is surprisingly responsive, I think that the performance > limitations of such an implementation of python would become rather painful > in the context of a 3d game. Pyglet is already painfully slow in the context of a 3d game. I doubt that will improve until PyPy matures, but the key point is that you don't need blazing speed for most of the things people seem to be using pyglet for. -- Tristam MacDonald http://swiftcoder.wordpress.com/ -- 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.
