Hi Peter, On 1/18/07, Peter Gebauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So rather consider yet another attempt at using a 3rd party language
Sorry I miss wrote, what I meant is a 3rd part parsing tool.
I totally get what you're saying, but at the same time, why use Python if you can't even _use_ Python?
That's whay I might have typed, but not meant :-)
If one removes the nifty operator overloading, heritage, generators, duck typing and such one might as well use the C++ API directly since there's no real gain in using Python. I would like to see low-level bindings, whether they use osgIntrospection or not is a matter of maintenance, that have a high-level Python API that utilizes the full potential of the language.
I do understand the value of dynamic languages, and would like to see them well supported. I don't have the personal experience with Python or linking it with osgIntrospection, but I'd recommend against just giving up assuming that what you want to do can't be achieved. osgPython, osgIntrospection and genwrapper are all open source. If there are defincies then it is possible to address them. Addressing these rather than rolling yet another solution will be of alround benefit to the project. I can't lead the effort on this as I am swamped for other tasks, but I'd encourage others to think positively about and be prepared to roll your sleeves up and led your skills to job in hand. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@openscenegraph.net http://openscenegraph.net/mailman/listinfo/osg-users http://www.openscenegraph.org/
