I once proposed a compatible ssg extension :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/plib/nsssg.html
I was able to use it with flightgear without code change except to support the
new features ( like multi texturing and environment mapping ). The code still
exist but stalled after it was ignored by the plib
Vassilii Khachaturov wrote :
I once proposed a compatible ssg extension :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/plib/nsssg.html
I was able to use it with flightgear without code change except to support
the
new features ( like multi texturing and environment mapping ). The code still
exist but stalled
On Saturday 29 July 2006 14:28, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Vassilii Khachaturov wrote :
I once proposed a compatible ssg extension :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/plib/nsssg.html
I was able to use it with flightgear without code change except to
support the new features ( like multi texturing and
FWIW, the current precipitation rendering code is raw-gl-based as well,
not even done with proper branching via ssg; we just have a special call
to its rendering from within the renderer. I am currently working on
texturing-based precipitation which needs multitexturing, and naturally it
can't be
Selon Mathias Fröhlich :
Hi,
On Wednesday 26 July 2006 19:20, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
We had talked about abstracting out the raw gl-commands into just
one file, and then to use plib wrappers to plug the HUD into the
scene graph. The plib wrappers could eventually get replaced by osg
* Frederic Bouvier -- Thursday 27 July 2006 08:30:
I agree with Mathias : doing raw ogl call outside the scenegraph requires lots
of costly state save and restore
And as I said: the HUD doesn't do many state changes.
if you don't want to see your screen screwed.
OSG is extensible and
* Mathias Fröhlich -- Wednesday 26 July 2006 22:49:
Because it is not a limitation but rather a gain. A *well* *done* and *well*
*supported* scenegraph will help you some much more than you probably can
imagine now.
You completely miss the point: we are using ssg! There was no
decision made
Melchior,
On Thursday 27 July 2006 09:58, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Mathias Fröhlich -- Wednesday 26 July 2006 22:49:
Because it is not a limitation but rather a gain. A *well* *done* and
*well* *supported* scenegraph will help you some much more than you
probably can imagine now.
You
* Mathias Fröhlich -- Thursday 27 July 2006 18:15:
I believe that you miss the point.
That may be ...
The point is that we can, without loosing features, with a sensible design,
prepare getting rid of ssg. As allmost allways, building sensible structures
is a win even if no switch will
* Melchior FRANZ -- Thursday 27 July 2006 18:31:
(A) discussion, (B) decision, (C) branching, (D) entering the shiny
world of osg.
BTW: I would check this branch out, test it, and try to help, although
I'm afraid that I can't do much. The whole scene graph thing isn't my
thing, as you may have
Melchior FRANZ schreef:
We had talked about abstracting out the raw gl-commands into just
one file, and then to use plib wrappers to plug the HUD into the
scene graph. The plib wrappers could eventually get replaced by osg
wrappers.
The abstraction is still a goal, and so is plugging the HUD
* Robin van Steenbergen -- Wednesday 26 July 2006 19:43:
Rendering to texture would allow us to use those
glass displays inside virtual cockpits
This possibility has already been dismissed, with good arguments.
Render-to-texture support isn't guaranteed on all graphics cards.
And, frankly,
Hi,
On Wednesday 26 July 2006 19:20, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
We had talked about abstracting out the raw gl-commands into just
one file, and then to use plib wrappers to plug the HUD into the
scene graph. The plib wrappers could eventually get replaced by osg
wrappers.
The abstraction is
13 matches
Mail list logo