World: r3wp
[!REBOL3 Extensions] REBOL 3 Extensions discussions
older newer | first last |
Janko 18-Sep-2009 [158] | yes, ogre is really "topnothch" .. maybe you could reuse, maybe the ones who made python/lua/... bindings already made a c overlay |
Maxim 18-Sep-2009 [159x2] | ah good idea.. will see their approach as a reference for mine. |
so far, the way I understand it, its possible that callbacks aren't necessary for Ogre. Not for simple scene creation and interaction AFAICT. | |
Janko 18-Sep-2009 [161x2] | there are at least python / java / .NET / lua bindings that I am aware of .. making something like python-ogre for rebol would be awesome |
but also quite a task .. maybe you could geenrate rebol binding or part of it from some othe binding programatically .. I know some folks did something like that for GTK / WxWidgets from haskell to ocaml | |
Maxim 18-Sep-2009 [163x2] | and the actuall download isn't insane... it ~45MB. for a full-featured cutting-edge 3D engine this is very small. We have to remember that 3D and image aren't just functions, they actually require data which, because of the array aspect of them, requires a lot of memory... so I am thinking that a large part of the 45MB is in fact source data which is needed, in order to populate the actual scene. |
yep, programmatically binding the engine is what I plan to do... especially since it will allows us to rebuild the binding at any moment just by flicking a switch and update it without any user-intervention. so far, my options are: -a direct wrapper generator coded in REBOL using C++ sources, with an advanced C++ declaration to R3 Extension converter, -I try out SWIG build an R3 extension output module for it, -I use another language binding as the one to base mine with, and make a specific tool to convert it to an R3 extension. -do a manual (and painfull) convertion, using a few generic scene interaction commands. One thing I'd like, is to add some way for the OGRE extension to be able to call REBOL code directly via callbacks, using their Extensive hooks throughout the api. Although this will be slower than if the callbacks where in C, obviously, some parts of REBOL are swift enough (like series management) that they just might make the cut for REAL time rendering hooks. Well implemented, they would be fast enough for common GUI interaction events for sure. | |
Janko 18-Sep-2009 [165] | very cool, as I said this is not a minor task but if you do it it will be very awesome! |
Maxim 18-Sep-2009 [166] | I Will, I need it :-) |
Janko 18-Sep-2009 [167] | what will you be making? |
Maxim 18-Sep-2009 [168x3] | ElixirOS and some other commercial stuff which needs serious scalable views rendering tens of thousands of objects in real-time. |
the first piece of the cake is building GLASS with whatever 3D engine I can extension. | |
GLASS is a general purpose GUI using advanced dataflow programming at its core. I've got some prototypes of various pieces of GLASS using R2 and AGG which work really well, but I've been waiting to be able to do HW gfx before Investing time on the real GLASS, which integrates the prototypes and new stuff too. | |
NickA 19-Sep-2009 [171x3] | I |
Max | |
(Oops). Max, I experimented with OGRE in Purebasic a few years ago. Frederic Laboureur built a very nice interface to it, which comes built in native to Purebasic. He'd likely be a good person to chat with, and he's very active on the purebasic forums... | |
Maxim 20-Sep-2009 [174x3] | noted :-) I'm starting to really look into this right now... taking a break from my "serious" programming. |
will start by playing around with the C++ stuff, basically building a simple scene.... when that is working, I'll try to build an extension, allowing me to do the same calls via R3 | |
btw, some of the picks from apps make with Ogre are damned beautifull! | |
Pekr 20-Sep-2009 [177] | what is so special about the Ogre? Just a 3D engine, no? Is it used mostly for games? What would you use it for? |
Maxim 20-Sep-2009 [178x5] | programming for a 3D rendering engine and for a scene engine is a totally different affaire... just like using DRAW vs using AGG directly. |
Ogre is probably the most complete open source scene engine, which can use both OpenGL and DirectX. | |
its a complete hardware abstraction, so the exact same code will run under any hardware/OS implementation. | |
This layer handles all of the nasties for complex math like shadows and even some of the SW & HW shader/texture manipulations at a higher-level. | |
but since its all open source, you can fix specific issues or optimise parts of the engine to suit your needs, if you really have to. | |
Pekr 20-Sep-2009 [183x2] | so Ogre is in 3D kind of what AGG is for use in 2D - an cross platform abstraction? |
use=us | |
Maxim 20-Sep-2009 [185x5] | yes. |
and its VERY clean. Its EXTREMELY documented and there are many FANTASTIC plugings from all sorts of authors. (using apple type marketing hype here ;-) | |
and next version will be MIT which means total licensing freedom. | |
just the fact that you can retarget the whole 3D engine to direct X, OpenGL (or another if you wanted to do so) is really impressive. | |
I guess this comes with some visual difference, but it means you can make it as optimised as you need it depending on platform. | |
Pekr 20-Sep-2009 [190x2] | I wonder how well does REBOL work with such kind of stuff. What will you use? Kind of direct linking to functions? Or kind of dialect abstraction as we use for AGG (draw)? |
What is the best method to hold data/config to external systems and their data structure? Is that an object? Or utypes? :-) | |
Maxim 20-Sep-2009 [192x5] | both, scene creation will be dialect based, with a full mapping of EVERY single public class, member & method |
utypes would allow us to abstract the interface, so that would be my preference. otherwise I usually use objects or nested blocks for complex structures. | |
above: "with a full mapping" I meant that "there will *also* be a full mapping" | |
with vector support this will make it very fast to xfer data between 3D apps & rebol, since the data will be usable AS-IS in both directions :-) | |
which always part of the point of implementing vectors AFAIK. | |
Pekr 20-Sep-2009 [197] | do we have multidimensional vectors? |
Maxim 20-Sep-2009 [198] | I don't remember... Not in the first releas IIRC |
Pavel 22-Sep-2009 [199] | Probably to BrianH: is it possible to open file in Rebol and transfer the filehandle to extension C routine? Or is it neccessry to give the filename as parameter and reopen in extension subroutine? |
Pekr 22-Sep-2009 [200] | I forwarded the question to R3 Chat IIRC, but no reply. We will see, once we get back to the Extensions topic. Now there are some big changes to 'parse happening, so I would probably not disturb Carl with additional questions :-) |
Pavel 22-Sep-2009 [201x3] | Is it even possible to unload extension? IE where and when RX_Quit comes into action? |
Practically when you want to restart/exchande extension you have to close whole rebol process. | |
exchande=exchange | |
Maxim 22-Sep-2009 [204] | I've seen no documented way, so far, but I am assuming this will possible when extensions will be fully done. |
BrianH 22-Sep-2009 [205x2] | I would guess that they unload when collected by the GC, and definitely when R3 quits. |
Answers to Pavel: 1) Don't know, but I doubt it. I'll check the port model. 2) Probably. | |
Maxim 22-Sep-2009 [207] | but we *should* be allowed to unload extensions ... eventually... if only for testing purposes. even if its "dangerous". its up to the developper to be clean if he wants to attempt unloading... I woudn't want R3 to prevent me.... "for my own protection" |
older newer | first last |