On Thursday, 26 March 2015 22:25:12 UTC-6, William wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:18 PM, Andrey Novoseltsev <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > > On Thursday, 26 March 2015 20:22:29 UTC-6, William wrote: > >> > >> > >> I think THREE.js and webgl have much more potential than the > >> javascript based jmol. > >> > > > > Perhaps, but despite of all its issues, JSmol > > - works reasonably well on computers not supporting webgl (probably not > > important for those concentrating on US, but I imagine in the rest of > the > > world people still may use oldish computers and buying a modern one is > not > > an option), > > THREE.js falls back to canvas rendering when webgl isn't available. > How can jsmol be faster than canvas? (I'm not saying it isn't -- it > just seems to me that it should be about the same.) >
I don't know how, but on my laptop where canvas is used it is absolutely not usable for rotating any non-trivial plot (the static picture is OK). > > > - is consistent between different browsers and platforms (I am yet to > see it > > produce different output for the same code, while three.js keeps > surprising > > me, like today it just stopped working in Firefox for no clear reason), > > I'm curious -- was this the fault of three.js or something else (e.g., > my code) built on top of three.js? Were you using it in SageMathCloud > or somewhere else? > I am using it mostly through SageMathCell that has similar code, but part of the differences comes from thick lines which are Windows webgl issue, but not others. Also, on a fixed platform it may depend on the browser if webgl or canvas is used (i.e. Firefox may use one and Chrome another). Even when things seem to be OK with webgl, canvas plots on the same machine/browser may look a bit different, I think due to lighting or transparency. > > - has no problems with partially transparent surfaces, > > Yes, this is a problem for three.js with webgl (but not with canvas). > When forcing canvas, my impression was that in general it is not well suited for rotating plots - it is just too slow even on modern computers. > > > - has no issues with lines of fixed width, > > Surely that's not impossible to fix...? > Surely, but that's the problem with DirectX or something, so the fix has to be in three.js, not in the way we use it. CAD people also need them and the problem is known for many years without any changes, it seems. > > > - is the prettiest plotter available in Sage. > > That may very well be. > > > > > Andrey > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > "sage-devel" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an > > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <javascript:>. > > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > -- > William (http://wstein.org) > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
