Noah Kantrowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 写道：
The problem with chipmunk, and by extension box2d, is what exactly? I
would rather see the existing bindings improved than someone try
writing a new engine. Perhaps make a library that provides a mixin to
easily enable binding pygame Sprite objects to physics objects.
--Noah
Thank you for your good advice.
Fist I'd like to tell the diffiences between our physics engine and Chipmunk:
my engine will be integrated with Pygame directly which means it offers more
user-friendly interfaces. for example, a user who use pygame as a 2D graphics
engine and pymunk as 2D physics engine, he or she must write codes for managing
both rendering state sand physics states of game objects, just like you said
before "binding between physics object and sprite", by contrast, our engine in
Pygame will manage them all automaticly, and I want to offer some more useful
special interfaces for game development like rigid-doll system and explosion
system in future. This engine is just a part of pygame which means it is
integrated with pygame inside.
Indeed, Writing a new engine maybe sound like a little ambitious and useless. I
have ever thought about just to wrap a mature physics library in Python like
Box2D engine and improve it by writing a layer for binding and so on, but I'm a
fan of physics development, I decide to make it on my own. I know It's hard for
me to make a mature one in just three months, but I want to give Pygame users
more choices in physics module with pygame and I will improve it with other
people in the community for making it better, I hope it won't end after google
SOC. And I'm dedicating myself into this project.
---------------------------------
雅虎邮箱，您的终生邮箱！
