Re: Physics Engine integration for Libre Office impress

2016-03-04 Thread Thorsten Behrens
Mayank Gupta wrote: > I'm thinking of BOX2D but since it is only about 2D simulation and > GSOC 2016 Idea for this project has suggested Bullet Physics too. > Nah, 2D is fine for the while. Cheers, -- Thorsten signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Physics Engine integration for Libre Office impress

2016-03-04 Thread Armin Le Grand
Hi, Am 04.03.2016 um 13:51 schrieb Wols Lists: On 04/03/16 09:12, Mayank Gupta wrote: I'm concerned about it because 3D rendering would require more GPU performance than 2D. Is this true? From what I keep picking up nowadays, pretty much the only place you'll find 2D hardware is in obsolete

Re: Physics Engine integration for Libre Office impress

2016-03-04 Thread Wols Lists
On 04/03/16 09:12, Mayank Gupta wrote: > I'm concerned about it because 3D rendering would require more GPU > performance than 2D. Is this true? From what I keep picking up nowadays, pretty much the only place you'll find 2D hardware is in obsolete machines. The kickback everybody trying to

Physics Engine integration for Libre Office impress

2016-03-04 Thread Mayank Gupta
Hello, Prior I've been researching about libGDX to integrate with Libre Office. But since lDE's supported by Libre Office aren't supported by libGDX. I'm thinking of BOX2D but since it is only about 2D simulation and GSOC 2016 Idea for this project has suggested Bullet Physics too. So adding 3D