Talk:World Simulator

From SpaceElevatorWiki.com
Revision as of 16:56, 13 June 2008 by Jeko (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigationJump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Engine in C# (vs C/C++)

Good and bad points

  • ++ It's C#
  • -- Overload of evaluating the track to be displayed (Many marshaling required).

Discussion

To start, I guess for now I'll just make some minimal improvements in C++, it's a good way to make me comfortable with the code base. Probably when enough things will start to be ported to C# we'll consider making the 3D engine working completely in C#. Although this is often a module where performance should not be sacrificed and to much "C# to C++" calls may hurt performances.

Scene-Graph (vs Custom Renderer)

Good and bad points

  • -- Outdoor scene like quad-trees / octrees ([1] and [2])
  • -- Good scene graphs are in C++, what about the completeness of wrappers?
  • -- It's fun to write a 3D renderer

Discussion

Concerning this and the scene graph, I don't think we need a complex scene graph. In every project I made, the use of a specific scene graph quickly became a limitation. Taken this into account, I prefer we write a tiny 3D engine completely in C#, just containing the flat list of 3D objects in the world, it's easy and probably faster: no wrapper, we're free to make application-specific optimizations, etc. For example we can then switch to a quad-tree (or octree) for storing objects, which is really better than a scene graph in an outdoor scene. ([3] and [4])

Humm, if you want to understand my opinion about scene graph you can see what says this guy: [5]

Toolkits

  • OpenTK, an OpenGL/AL wrapper as well as a toolkit providing math functions, etc.
    • This may be a good choice to. It has less dependencies than TAO (since/however it provides less wrappers..).
  • TAO