[Bf-committers] Gameengine - ODE and Python
Willian Padovani Germano
29 Jul 2003 14:26:07 -0300
Hi, Michael (sorry for another huge email ...)
Amazing, you uncovered gameengine coding activity : ). Like Patrick, I
was also thinking that it was dead, dead, dead ...
On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 07:17, maci_ray wrote:
> I tried to start there, but the success was quite small. Physics seem
> work, if I activate phantom, what eleminates the collision (geom)
For the future, ODE really looks like the way to go.
> In the mailing list two other developers came out :-).
In the middle of a refreshing flood of emails : ). The momentum
shouldn't be lost now.
Consider the Python example, guys: much probably there would be no new
implementation now if Michel hadn't started it the way he did -- and
scripting might be a very problematic area of Blender code. Like you
guys are doing with the gameengine, he studied the embedding code,
traced clear objectives -- rather ambitious in that moment, more than he
knew -- and *(important)* announced and gave reports of what he was
The source looks overwhelming when we first look at it. And I knew
nothing about embedding. But after his initial work, I could simply
concentrate on the Python/C doc and two Blender files (a DNA header and
the start of the Object module implementation) and implement a new
module. From there it was much easier and fun to explore and learn
about other parts of the Blender source. The same happened with Guignot
More than a new implementation, his initiative "nurtured" active
developers for Blender as a whole and in particular for this once
problematic area, that is now manageable and easier to read / learn
Knowing well the situation with the game engine, maybe we could attract
people from the ODE community (specially if Blender becomes a good place
to showcase/test/tweak simulation parameters, for ODE users).
As Douglas mentioned, integrating ODE in Blender can bring quite
interesting possibilities to the program, so this approximation is
I'm very interested in learning ODE, and about to start studying its
docs / examples, so I'l be one more willing at least to follow the
developments and hopefully help a little in the future. I can also help
with Python, but won't have time for the "ground work" of understanding
by myself the game engine as a whole, report my findings and from them
define clear and specific objectives. If an "interest group" is formed,
things will be easier.
Another example of the "power" of information: Kester's report already
showed something -- the SDL sound output -- that intrr may be interested
The other issue for some (me included): C++. This site:
www.bruceeckel.com has a free two volume book on C++ (and also books for
Java, Python). Personally I enjoy reading his books.
> I think this would be very bad. I love the way acting as make some
> objects, meshes and just press P to see what is going on.
(about stand-alone player). Well, this can probably be done even with a
separate player: 'P' or a button press would save the current file and
open the player to run it. This is more about modular design, which may
be a choice for the future of Blender.
> > About your diagrams, if you can post them somewhere, I'd be
> I`ll send them directly to you.
I got them, thanks a lot : ), they are very helpful. I'm a complete
newbie at UML diagrams, but willing to learn.
What about suggesting the gameengine as one of the topics for next
Sunday's irc meeting?