Zitiere James Tittle II tigital@mac.com:
...can't believe we're finally really so close...
...that is, until I start looking closely at some things that were on my plate:
- I don't like [camera] in it's current form, because it doesn't do
what it should! ATM, it's just a kind of substitute for changing GemMan::m_lookat[] variables, which just use the gluLookAt() function...sure, this is an ok way to have a camera that "looks at" a particular point in a scene, but this doesn't seem to be the correct way to do a true "free-floating" camera, which would allow flythroughs
and such (as of now, if you "fly-thru", you always remain anchored to the original point)...looking back on this, I remember getting stuck with the gluLookAt() method, because it's so integral in the gemchain :-( ...anyone have other ideas?
i don't undestand the exact problem. glLookat can handle original points: you can realize a "fly-thru" with "view"-messages (although i admit that it is rather nasty that you have to do everything by hand, instead of simple "roll"ing etc.)
- pix_objects that don't have the ability to deal with a certain pixel
format just return "pix object cannot handle *", which isn't very informative: what if someone has many pix's, but only one isn't supporting the needed pixel format?
indeed i have always wanted the objects to know their own name. since you requested it, i have checked it into the CVS now: so the error now is more like "pix object [pix_alpha] cannot handle YUV". but of course, still the user has no clue about what could be done on their side to fix this.
- I'm really starting to be against naming this "0.888": we've worked
the above mentioned), surely we're at v1.0?
well, as i have said before, i am afraid of "1.0" anyhow, if all (or most) of the developers prefer v1.0 then we should just make it. so chris, daniel, günter ?
mfg.aser IOhannes