This would require the user to be aware of the fact that the Visitor has not
finished its work after dtor is called.
This is even more user unfriendly in my point of view.
Sam
--
Read this topic online here:
http://forum.openscenegraph.org/viewtopic.php?p=35988#35988
__
If it's so important it get called automatically, why can't you run your
"finalize" code in the destructor?
On 1/25/2011 3:36 PM, Sam Warns wrote:
> Hi,
>
> that is exactly the point. My RemoveXVisitor SHOULD remove nodes but since
> it is not possible to do that in apply and there is no "finali
On 1/25/2011 1:36 PM, Sam Warns wrote:
Hi,
that is exactly the point. My RemoveXVisitor SHOULD remove nodes but since it is not
possible to do that in apply and there is no "finalize" method that gets
automatically called after accept has finished, it is only possible to remove nodes by
prov
Hi,
that is exactly the point. My RemoveXVisitor SHOULD remove nodes but since it
is not possible to do that in apply and there is no "finalize" method that gets
automatically called after accept has finished, it is only possible to remove
nodes by providing a custom member which the user must
On 1/25/2011 4:34 AM, Sam Warns wrote:
Hi Robert,
I am aware of the possibility to define my own methods in the visitor but the
point I was trying to explain is, that if I apply a visitor on a scene I would
except that this visitor has finished its work after calling the
node->accept(myVisito
Hi Sam,
Your expectations are unreasonable, please them recalibrate otherwise
you are going to constantly disappointed that everything in the world
doesn't conform to you prior conceptions. In the case of the
NodeVisitor where you are seeing a limitation, it's actually a
positive and deliberate f
Hi Robert,
I suppose I expect that because let's say a "RemoveGroupsVisitor" should remove
Groups from a given graph, when I apply this visitor to a scene by
Code:
RemoveGroupsVisitor r;
scene->accept(r);
I personally would expect that now the groups are removed, which they are not
by the
Hi Sam,
I simply don't get why your are expecting things from the NodeVisitor
that it isn't intended to provide, and what you can very simply
provide yourself.
There are many examples of NodeVisitor's in action in the OSG please
do a search through the code base.
Robert.
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at
Hi Robert,
I am aware of the possibility to define my own methods in the visitor but the
point I was trying to explain is, that if I apply a visitor on a scene I would
except that this visitor has finished its work after calling the
node->accept(myVisitor)
If I have a RemoveXVisitor and I as t
Hi Sam,
You have complete control over what you do before and after traversal,
there really isn't any need to have a finalize method as it would only
restrict what users can do over what they can already do.
If you wanted an finialize method in your visitor then just write a
method like:
MyVi
Hi Robert,
the second half of my post is about the second option you was talking about.
The apply only gathers the nodes in question and does nothing else then there
is another method that performs the removal from parent.
But the issue with that is, that if I do not call this method, no removal
Hi Sam,
You can't remove an object from it's a parent in a apply() method as
this would invalidate the iterators of the calling code (the
traverse() method that calls the node->accept() which in turn calls
the apply()).
It's safe to remove the children of a node you are passed in a the
apply meth
Hi,
I was writing a Visitor that performed an extraction of certain elements from a
scenegraph. My first try was to remove the nodes in question from their parents
directly in the apply method which lead to some exceptions.
So what am I doing wrong? I mean I would except some finalize method whi
13 matches
Mail list logo