Wish me luck :
In JCD we trust 
may the force be with you.
EDIT: spelling
Hi JCD,
Apologies - I’ve been absent from the Xith3D forum for a couple of weeks and didn’t realise there was interest in the LWJGL binding!
Did you get any of the 0.9 upgrade done? Or ported any recent changes in the JOGL layer?
Unless you say otherwise, I’ll look into the latest Xith3D and get the changes made.
Charlie.
Hey y’all - please have a look at using the GL interface in org.lwjgl.util.* for Xith. Might help as it works in a similar way to JOGL (i.e. instance of a GL thing instead of static).
You can write an adapter for JOGL that turns our LWJGL-style buffer calls into JOGL-style buffer calls that implements the new org.lwjgl.util.GL interface.
Cas
I had it up and working for a week or so, I remember posting a link to it.
Lemmie dig it
PS: Here’s the source file
Here’s the binary file file
[quote]Hey y’all - please have a look at using the GL interface in org.lwjgl.util.* for Xith.
[/quote]
Ah, but how do you resolve the architecture differences in things like the GLU? Yep, Xith uses the GLU for bounding boxes etc.
Hi,
[quote]Xith uses the GLU for bounding boxes etc.
[/quote]
I think we should factor out GLU usage instead, at least because of calls to GLU crash at least on some Linux configurations (that’s why some of GLU functions already implemented in Java - check CanvasPeerImpl)
Yuri
[quote]I think we should factor out GLU usage instead, at least because of calls to GLU crash at least on some Linux configurations
[/quote]
Hmm, LWJGL has a working java GLU port org.lwjgl.opengl.glu.* it might be a good idea to bang our heads together here and use either that, or find some other way to cooperate - it would be foolish to do the work twice. Ofcourse there are issues as to how it should be done, but at least agreeing to work together on this, so that LWJGL, Xith3D, JOGL and jMe may use the java port would be a good thing…
That’ll come back down to that irritating “instance of gl” major API style difference again won’t it though.
I vote to not use GLU. Especially not for this trivial functionality.
Cas
[quote]That’ll come back down to that irritating “instance of gl” major API style difference again won’t it though.
[/quote]
doh, forgot that - well, that kinda puts a hole in that idea.
[quote]I vote to not use GLU. Especially not for this trivial functionality.
[/quote]
Well, people are used to glu …
People might be, but Xith users are not… Xith users use a scenegraph, not GLU. So who cares how it’s implemented 
Cas
100% agree with Cas.
Could be that we can borrow needed bits of code from LWJGL implementation of GLU, if there are no objections Looks like license allows to do that.
Yuri
Of course you may - just pop a word of thanks in to ErikD for his porting efforts.
Cas