Hi Guys,

�I think that depending on your goals both approaches are good:
�
�- binding to OpenGL
�it would be very cool to have a working/solid solution in this area.
�As Henrik and Marcus said, native support would be great.
�If I remember correctly, �Lumiere is not very usable.
�Perhaps with NativeBoost and its GL bindings could be a way to go.

�- software 3D (no hardware support)
�As Alex said, for simple stuff it could be enough and it is easier to ensure portability.
�But be carreful of the size of your scenes because I think that Moose graphs could be huge and it could be really really slow...

Cheers,

#Luc



2011/9/20 St�phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>
Ok what is your experience with lumiere?
I would like to see if we can have Plotz or another solution to display metrics in Moose.

Stef

On Sep 20, 2011, at 1:53 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:

> I think that recoding a 3d engine is easier and much less frustrating that making Pharo talk to OpenGl. I am not aware of the last progresses made on that front, but I burnt 1 student on this.
>
> Codecity visualizations are not complex, it is just a matter of displaying triangles and multiplying matrixes. A student here learnt Smalltalk that way:
> http://bergel.eu/download/papers/Jaca11a-Klotz.pdf
>
> Cheers,
> Alexandre
>
> On 20 Sep 2011, at 08:45, St�phane Ducasse wrote:
>
>> Hi guys
>>
>> we would like to propose a fun project and the idea would be to build a little codecity.
>> Now what are the frameworks to develop 3d interactive world in Pharo?
>>
>> � � �- Lumiere?
>> � � �- opengl binding?
>>
>> Stef
>
> --
> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
> Alexandre Bergel �http://www.bergel.eu
> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
>
>
>
>
>
>