[ruby-opengl-devel] Re : Requirements and Design

minh thu noteed at gmail.com
Sat Sep 2 03:35:54 EDT 2006


Hello,

You've written a nice file. It's actually a consensus doc to my eyes.

> [...]
> >  Further, I'm also warming up to the
> > idea of having the module names first-letter-only-capitalized:
>
>   I'm not worrying about the "Gl" vs "GL" issue right now.  That's a
> ten second fix in the code, and a simple query replace in the ruby
> scripts if we get it wrong.  I have a preference for doing it the ruby
> way, unless there is a compelling reason not to, so I'd lean toward
> "Gl".

My idea is that I'm likely to make mistake in a two letter name which
has upper and lower case.. I find it more readable in only one case.
Anyway, if the ruby way is to have 'Gl', I'm fine with it. (but it's
against the C closeness we wanted)
But ... I thought that 'somewhat standard' libs have lowercase name,
am I wrong ?
(I agree this is a very litte issue :)

>
> > * Regarding tracking of different versions of GL and GLUT, 0.32pre2
> > already has Yoshi's conditional stuff in it for older versions. Anyone
> > know how difficult it would be with SWIG to get it to do the same sort
> > of thing?
> >
> > Peter -- have you formed an opinion on the SWIG issue yet?
>
>   My only reluctance in doing it by hand is the tedium of ensuring we
> get it *all* done.  I guess in either case, we'll want a test suite
> that excercises all of the functions.  I imagine a quick script to
> read gl.h and spit out some c-stubs might be in order.  I'm ok going
> with the non-swig.
>

There is the same question about ruby versions... for this issue, swig
has a lot of conditionals in its generated code.

I'm trying the non-swig and non-manual, i.e. the script, way. It seems
promising to me and could be reused to write test code. I hope to have
something concrete to show by the end of the day; anyway I will commit
it tonigth (if I my connection doesn't get down like yesterday :).

bye,
thu


More information about the ruby-opengl-devel mailing list