• Extrawurst (3/3) Aug 11 2007 does anyone know if there is a D Port of the OpenSceneGraph Project?
• mandel (5/9) Aug 11 2007 I agree, it would be very nice to have a D port of the OpenSceneGraph Pr...
• Robert Fraser (2/6) Aug 12 2007 Try bcd.gen; it says it's able to create a C go-between to enable interf...
• Tristam MacDonald (6/14) Aug 13 2007 Given the size and complexity of OSG, I don't think any automated
• Extrawurst (2/18) Aug 13 2007
• Bill Baxter (5/9) Aug 13 2007 Really? Like what? I haven't seriously looked at OSG for years, but I
• Tristam MacDonald (13/24) Aug 13 2007 I don't deny that it is well managed, and even well designed. But I find...
• Bill Baxter (5/31) Aug 13 2007 I certainly won't argue with you about porting OSG to D. That would be

Extrawurst <spam extrawurst.org> writes:

does anyone know if there is a D Port of the OpenSceneGraph Project?
link: http://www.openscenegraph.org/projects/osg

that would be so cool to have under D.

mandel <mandel mailinator.com> writes:

Extrawurst Wrote:

 does anyone know if there is a D Port of the OpenSceneGraph Project?
 link: http://www.openscenegraph.org/projects/osg
 
 that would be so cool to have under D.

I agree, it would be very nice to have a D port of the OpenSceneGraph Project
or OpenSG. (http://opensg.vrsource.org/trac/wiki/OSGComparison)
Bindings would be problematic since D cannot easily interface to C++ (using a C
layer).
Porting is a big cake of work, but I would like to contribute the translation
of a file or two. :-)

Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.coim> writes:

Extrawurst Wrote:

 does anyone know if there is a D Port of the OpenSceneGraph Project?
 link: http://www.openscenegraph.org/projects/osg
 
 that would be so cool to have under D.

Try bcd.gen; it says it's able to create a C go-between to enable interfacing
with C++ code. Not sure how effective it is, but it's worth a try (loads easier
than porting, anyway).

Tristam MacDonald <swiftcoder gmail.com> writes:

Given the size and complexity of OSG, I don't think any automated 
solution is going to be sufficient. besides, while OSG is quite handy, 
they made some rather dubious design decisions, and it doesn't feel very 
nice. Perhaps a more modern visualization framework would be a better 
choice for development in D.

Robert Fraser wrote:
 Extrawurst Wrote:
 
 does anyone know if there is a D Port of the OpenSceneGraph Project?
 link: http://www.openscenegraph.org/projects/osg

 that would be so cool to have under D.

 
 Try bcd.gen; it says it's able to create a C go-between to enable interfacing
with C++ code. Not sure how effective it is, but it's worth a try (loads easier
than porting, anyway).

Extrawurst <spam extrawurst.org> writes:

what other visualization framework would u suggest ?


Tristam MacDonald schrieb:
 Given the size and complexity of OSG, I don't think any automated 
 solution is going to be sufficient. besides, while OSG is quite handy, 
 they made some rather dubious design decisions, and it doesn't feel 
 very nice. Perhaps a more modern visualization framework would be a 
 better choice for development in D.

 Robert Fraser wrote:
 Extrawurst Wrote:

 does anyone know if there is a D Port of the OpenSceneGraph Project?
 link: http://www.openscenegraph.org/projects/osg

 that would be so cool to have under D.

 Try bcd.gen; it says it's able to create a C go-between to enable 
 interfacing with C++ code. Not sure how effective it is, but it's 
 worth a try (loads easier than porting, anyway).

Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:

Tristam MacDonald wrote:
 Given the size and complexity of OSG, I don't think any automated 
 solution is going to be sufficient. besides, while OSG is quite handy, 
 they made some rather dubious design decisions, and it doesn't feel very 
 nice. 

Really?  Like what?  I haven't seriously looked at OSG for years, but I 
was under the impression that it was one of the better managed and 
designed open source projects out there.

--bb

Tristam MacDonald <swiftcoder gmail.com> writes:

I don't deny that it is well managed, and even well designed. But I find 
it suffers from a rather 'monolithic' philosophy (how many distinct 
database formats are really useful in one app?). It also has a more 
immediate issue as regards to porting to D, namely that the platform 
interface for every platform (and API) is a separate module, each 
written in the native language and API - which would require us to 
maintain all of them.

It also relies heavily on community plugins to provide advanced 
functionality, and these are very varied in quality and completeness, 
and would also have to be ported separately - this includes most of the 
windowing toolkits, physics integration, terrain support and character 
animation toolkits.

Bill Baxter wrote:
 Tristam MacDonald wrote:
 Given the size and complexity of OSG, I don't think any automated 
 solution is going to be sufficient. besides, while OSG is quite handy, 
 they made some rather dubious design decisions, and it doesn't feel 
 very nice. 

 
 Really?  Like what?  I haven't seriously looked at OSG for years, but I 
 was under the impression that it was one of the better managed and 
 designed open source projects out there.
 
 --bb

Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:

I certainly won't argue with you about porting OSG to D.  That would be 
one hell of a job.

But it seems like for C++, OpenSceneGraph is still a pretty good option.

--bb

Tristam MacDonald wrote:
 I don't deny that it is well managed, and even well designed. But I find 
 it suffers from a rather 'monolithic' philosophy (how many distinct 
 database formats are really useful in one app?). It also has a more 
 immediate issue as regards to porting to D, namely that the platform 
 interface for every platform (and API) is a separate module, each 
 written in the native language and API - which would require us to 
 maintain all of them.
 
 It also relies heavily on community plugins to provide advanced 
 functionality, and these are very varied in quality and completeness, 
 and would also have to be ported separately - this includes most of the 
 windowing toolkits, physics integration, terrain support and character 
 animation toolkits.


 
 Bill Baxter wrote:
 Tristam MacDonald wrote:
 Given the size and complexity of OSG, I don't think any automated 
 solution is going to be sufficient. besides, while OSG is quite 
 handy, they made some rather dubious design decisions, and it doesn't 
 feel very nice. 

 Really?  Like what?  I haven't seriously looked at OSG for years, but 
 I was under the impression that it was one of the better managed and 
 designed open source projects out there.

 --bb