Features have to implemented, ported and maintained, the more features
> you stuff into the code to more less each feature gets tested and
> debugged, and the lower the user to feature ratio is, so the less
> available resources you have to maintain each line of code, so... code
> quality goes down and down and down.
>
Really good answer in point of view of maintainer, and this is not a
negligible think.
Now see this in point of view of user. Little stuff like swizzle in
Vec{2,3,4} is not really
important, but implementation of all glDraw* command, Debug output,
Conditionnal rendering, ... and other OpenGL
feature, not required to use OpenGL, but just another way to use openGL,
are important.
For example, we already have glDrawElements and glDrawInstancedElements, we
not really need of
glDrawElementsInstanced{BaseInstance}{BaseVertex} or glDrawElementIndirect
but this could be a good
think to add them in osg.
For new osg-user that evaluate osg, this could be one of decisive thing to
choose osg instead of another 3D engine.
In my position, if something is missing in osg, I just implement it and
this solve the problem.
For other osg-user, perhaps they don't know how to implement a missing
feature and just wait someone
do it, or choose another 3D engine.
As you say, we need to carefully choose what we add in OSG,
but I think OpenGL feature have to be add before we need it,
to be sure that OSG is a fine layer over OpenGL and not a fine
layer over a subset of OpenGL.
thoughts ?
Cheers
David
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
