On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 10:48:48AM -0700, Eric Griffis wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 10:25 PM Hendrik Boom <hend...@topoi.pooq.com> wrote:
> >
> > There's a port of glm in the Racket package library.
> > Is that the same one?  If not, is it also that huge?
> Same repository, different branch. The master branch, which is a
> couple months old now, implements the matrix and vector types on top
> of a single, list-based, length-agnostic structure type. It's a
> snapshot of the moment I realized the volume of code and run-time
> loops were becoming a problem.
> The new code is in the dev branch. It implements just the vector types
> in a manner similar to generic interfaces while also exposing a
> progression of increasingly type-specific variants. This allows me to
> prototype with a generic API, then eliminate the overhead of dynamic
> dispatch later by switching to more type-specific operations. (If it's
> not obvious, I'm working toward a pluggable type system harness, so
> the compiler can specialize and prune automatically.)
> > By the way, I'm working on updating the opengl package to the current
> > OpenGL 4.6 spec.  Because a change of format in Khronos's
> > specfiles, it appears to require a complete rewrite to its
> > specification translator.
> This is good news! Through March, I'll be announcing several graphics
> packages that could benefit from this directly. Let's try to keep a
> conversation going.

I'm the guy behind Rackettown, https://github.com/hendrikboom3/rackettown
It's an experiment about attribute management in procedurally-generated 
content, although it looks like a fairly simple building-drawing 

I wanted to move to doing it in 3D, and it too a little while to realise 
I needed to use openGl directly, rather than something like Pict3D.

I had some difficulty figuring out the arious tutorials, so I went to 
the current red book (covering opengl 4.6) and discovered that the baby 
steps used functions that weren't in the Racket binding (though they are 
present in the openGL on my Linux system.

So ... I'm redoing the binding, after a fruitless attempt tp find 
up-to-date versions of the old specfiles.

I'm hoping to test the new interface generator by comparing its output 
with the one in the present Racket package.  That will always be a bit 
awkward, because all the definitions are now in a new order, so a simple 
diff won't do.  Not to mention checking out the errors that Stephan 
discovered in the old specfiles.

-- hendrik

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 

Reply via email to