From:	frenchc AT cadvision DOT com (Calvin French)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Make new 3D LIB?
Date:	29 May 1997 05:42:09 GMT
Organization:	Reham Salad
Message-ID:	<5mj4vh$2ui0@elmo.cadvision.com>
References:	<338A190F DOT 45DC AT tc DOT umn DOT edu> <01bc6aa4$7baac060$7cb4e0c2 AT pentium-120>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	ts3ip110.cadvision.com
Mime-Version:	1.0
Lines:	25
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

In article <01bc6aa4$7baac060$7cb4e0c2 AT pentium-120>, gregorio AT jet DOT es says...

>> Hey... should I make jaw3d into a 3d game programming lib? I'm not sure
>> if it's even worth considering due to the awesome competition out there
>> ;) Take a look:
>
>It would be great if you implemented it into the Allegro library.

Jaw3D looks great, but please don't implement it into Allegro. Making it 
dependant on Allegro is definitely a good idea, which is basically the same 
as implementing it into allegro except that the jaw3D 3D stuff will be 
optional, and distributed seperately. I am personally also attempting a 
fiarly ambitious cross-platform 3D game lib for which the first "port" will 
be allegro. Anyways, it's a great idea, but the problem with implementing 
any high-level routines into allegro is that suddenly we've destroyed the 
flexibility of it. For instance, i'd never use a 3D version of allegro that 
used painters algorithm or even z-buffering; i'd only go with a BSP version. 
But other people would inevitably feel different. Still others would have 
different reservations on more complex 3D object formats, etc. But making it 
as a sort of allegro add-on is a wonderful idea, as Jaw3D (from the pics on 
the page) looks truly great!!! So don't get me negative I really think it's 
a great idea. Can't hurt, really, can it?

- Calvin -

- Raw text -