From: Eric B. <eb...@us...> - 2001-01-30 23:38:32
|
> From: On Behalf Of Marc Haisenko > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 6:25 PM > > > After mentioning PyOpenGL...you might want to include that as well...if you > > want to go that way. > > No, I don't want low-level API in our scripts ! Dangerous, unportable, bad ! > :-) No, instead we'll provide our own high-level API (I've already got some > basic ideas...) But why reinvent the wheel. We have a hard enough time getting all the piece done to begin with. I don't see the difference. So instead of someone elses high level API, we are using our own high level API. By this I mean, their implementation uses the defined python binding to external languages usage. This gives us the benefit of (1) we can build off of the functionality already handled by their work (2) providing another means to add features to the exysting PyOGL work and improve their product as well (3) take advantage of the OpenGL functionality from within the scripting language which will since OpenGL will likely be used anyway. I agree though, that rather than calling OpenGL from within Python, it is probably more efficient to call it straight from the C/C++ code or use Manfreds OGLClan wrapper. But then the issue becomes, we have to define some interfaces for Python/Perl/(insert favorite language here) that in some way interface with the binary client/server mechanism. Eric Bresie eb...@us... |