On Aug 10, 2004, at 2:26 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
what i do not understand on [color_set] is a) the name: wouldn't [vertex_color] fit better (to see what it is meant for, like [part_color]) b) the message "number": why is it "number" and not "vertex" as in [vertex_offset] ? i think the 2 are so similiar that 2 different messages for the same behaviour is non-intuitive.
any comments on these ? i would like to release this as soon as possible (to not start releasing for 3 years again...)
would it make sense to put it in a separate directory (just like particles) ??
The idea is to have all of the color manipulations separate from the vertex position ones. So color_set just sets the color value, overwriting the current data, while the not-yet-existing color_scale would multiply the color values by a value (useful for alpha-blending and fading perhaps?). The naming convention would continue to texcoord_scale, normal_set, and so on.
I'm not sold on any set way of handling vertex, color, tex_coord or normal data in GEM, so this is just my first idea.
Also, I should post a few patches that illustrate things like just adjusting a section of the array as well. Oh and the color array/objects should probably be unsigned chars not float, which doesn't affect the resolution one bit but speeds things up by a factor of four.
cgc
mfg.as.dr IOhannes
GEM-dev mailing list GEM-dev@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem-dev