Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #80793
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" |
| Date | 2021-08-08 13:03 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <in8oqrFqei1U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <c87155ac-7fc1-4607-af90-473af3082efan@googlegroups.com> <se8h2t$699$1@gioia.aioe.org> <cb325942-f16d-406c-935b-742d3225ba49n@googlegroups.com> <sebc3i$a4v$1@gioia.aioe.org> <3e034e70-c01d-47e7-b1fd-8eff465d73fan@googlegroups.com> |
On 04/08/2021 01:01, Öö Tiib wrote: > On Tuesday, 3 August 2021 at 15:17:10 UTC+3, Juha Nieminen wrote: >> Öö Tiib <oot...@hot.ee> wrote: >>> Feels rather unlikely that we want to do anything with such Vertex instance >>> in separation. Instead we want those to be processed (in massive >>> amounts) by some rendering engine (like OpenGL). >> I don't really understand why you have such a hard time imagining a situation >> where something like that Vertex class would feel like a very convenient and >> good design choice. >> >> Not all programs that handle, for example, triangle meshes are doing so to >> merely feed the data to OpenGL (or any other API). There may be myriads of >> reasons why a program may want to handle triangle meshes in some manner, >> and some of these applications may be something that benefit from extreme >> speed (because they may need to do a lot of heavy operations to gigantic >> triangle meshes). > > As rule we want to render those too. If for nothing else then for debugging. > Therefore if we really process 3D triangles directly then it is more convenient > to keep the data layout suitable for rendering API, even if we do part of > processing outside of that API as well. Our application's positioning engine does not render the triangle meshes we use for mapping. Its job is to work out where targets should be on a surface and to generate guidance lines on the map. The rendering is done in using OpenGL on another device. I'm sure this situation isn't uncommon. -- Ian.
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
"Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-07-27 14:59 -0500
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-07-27 13:48 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-07-27 22:05 +0100
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-07-27 14:23 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2021-08-05 19:49 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2021-08-19 20:08 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-08-19 18:20 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-08-20 06:13 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2021-08-20 06:17 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-08-20 00:03 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-08-20 11:03 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" mickspud@downthefarm.com - 2021-08-20 15:19 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-08-20 14:26 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-08-29 23:40 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-27 21:01 -0300
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-07-28 08:16 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 16:22 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-07-28 07:53 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 21:23 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-07-28 14:16 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-07-29 06:53 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-07-29 09:31 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" MrSpud_71i5@slwgrcbmd1l7yi1.org - 2021-07-30 11:21 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-08-01 08:28 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-08-01 05:49 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-08-02 10:23 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" MrSpud_rLY23@_h_.co.uk - 2021-08-02 15:05 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-08-03 04:57 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-08-03 12:16 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-08-03 06:01 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-08-08 13:03 +1200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-08-07 22:43 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-08-01 21:40 +0100
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2021-07-29 09:53 +0100
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-07-30 13:51 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-07-30 13:40 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 04:05 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" MrSpud_oyam9ltRb0@khlkg.info - 2021-07-28 09:30 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-07-28 08:19 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 13:10 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 18:37 -0500
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2021-08-05 18:17 -0300
Re:"Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Blue Hat <blue_hat@hackershaven.com.jm> - 2021-08-08 13:33 -0500
csiph-web