[ODE] Cylinder support
erwin at erwincoumans.com
Thu Jul 13 06:43:40 MST 2006
Indeed. The upcoming Bullet collision detection doesn't need OPCODE either.
This contribution is still scheduled before September this year,
but I'm just a bit busy preparing SIGGRAPH presentation / demos for COLLADA
1.4 physics format.
So it would be great to leave the option to disable OPCODE/trimesh.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bram Stolk" <bram at sara.nl>
To: "Jason Perkins" <starkos at gmail.com>
Cc: "ode-list" <ode at q12.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 6:25 AM
Subject: Re: [ODE] Cylinder support
> Jason Perkins wrote:
>> On 7/13/06, David Walters <hidden.asbestos at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> > I would say: scrap the flag, but if you do: make sure that you also
>>> > update alle the docs/readme/wikis/whathaveyou.
>>> Well since I mentioned it, I happily volunteer to make this change -
>>> if you don't mind, Jason?
>> You're in the club now...change away! I will also pull the flag from
>> the Premake scripts.
>> Would it also make sense to remove the trimesh option? Once upon a
>> time trimeshes were notoriously unstable, and opcode was an actively
>> developed library. These days even moving trimeshes are pretty good
>> and as far as I know ODE is the only project maintaining opcode. I'd
>> suggest that we always build in trimesh support, and only provide
>> flags to swap backend implementations (opcode vs. bullet, once Erwin
>> gets it online). This has always been a source of confusion for new
>> Any thoughts?
> No... OPCODE should not be req'd to build ODE.
> I would really like this to remain optional.
> Bram Stolk, VR Engineer SARA, Amsterdam. tel +31 20 592 3000
> "Windows is a 32-bit extension to a 16-bit graphical shell for an 8-bit
> operating system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor by a 2-bit
> company that can't stand 1 bit of competition."
> ODE mailing list
> ODE at q12.org
More information about the ODE