Discussion » Programming

This is a read-only copy. The forum ran on iamcal.com from 2000 until its database was lost in 2016, and this topic was rebuilt from copies saved by the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. Some replies may be missing, and its dates are approximate.
Posted by gobbo, 21:11, 20th January 2004:
 
Having recently decided to try and keep my programming skills alive ive done a few practice programs. Anyone interested in this sort of thing (Graphics, C++, OpenGL) your comments are very welcome, be they negative or positive (but constructive please). Simply download, unzip and double-click the program.

Cube (Simple spinning cube)
Fire Works (Particle System)
Bouncy Balls (basic Collision Detection)
Posted by cal, 22:05, 20th January 2004:
 
before i download and try running any of them, some general hints:

1. if you use opengl, always make full screen apps. it's slow as sin on most machines when windowed.

2. don't use opengl ;)
Posted by gobbo, 22:07, 20th January 2004:
 
1. Yours is the only machine ive ever found that on.

2. Bollox :D
Posted by cruelemort, 22:11, 20th January 2004:
 
The collision one is very effective, i like it. Did you find the particle systems and collsision detection difficult to do?

I have had an opengl graphics module for my uni course this semester and it was very interesting but concentrated more on the maths of doing graphics, for coursework we had to create a 3D world with robots in it. We did not go into many of the more complicated things such as you have done there but kept it simple.

If you have not done so already i would recommend looking at lighting, it is very simple to master and can be very effective, that was about the most complicated stuff we went into in our coursework.

Cal what would you recommend using instead of opengl?
Posted by gobbo, 22:13, 20th January 2004:
 
I think Cal would prefer to see me using DirectX, but I hate it. Microsoft made it. Need I say more?

Thanks for your comments cruelemort, yes the bouncing balls one has a single light source in and ive worked extensively with lighting, though getting the vertex normals is the most important part to making the lighting look good.
Posted by cruelemort, 22:16, 20th January 2004:
 
Ah yes the number of times i have created a light shining on a surface and it has been completely black and unlit :)
Posted by gobbo, 22:16, 20th January 2004:
 
further to what you were saying, the particles and collision isnt so bad once you understand the basics, getting it to look like something realistic is the hard part, I mean the particles look nice on the screen but they dont actually look like anything, of course you can render anything at a particle point, i could have used it to construct an iso-surface and had a lava lamp style blob forming there :)
Posted by cruelemort, 22:23, 20th January 2004:
 
Sounds kinda cool, for the coursework i did i decided to do baseball robots, i would have really loved to have had a collision detection so when one robot fires a ball the other can hit it with the bat but it would probably have meant extensive re-working of the project to do (i had done it in C without very much structure, i presumed to implement it easily it should be done in an OO language with each thing that can collide as a separate object)

I did enjoy the course when doing the actual programming but the problem was needing to learn all the maths, it got quite complicated and i lost interest because of that, but reckon i will do more programming in it when i get some time.
Posted by Brock, 23:16, 20th January 2004:
 
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

sorry ;)
Posted by Sul, 23:20, 20th January 2004:
 
I pity the people going against the Cal grain. Get ready for a verbal beating. ;)

I have no opinion. I've just seen how this type of conversation pans out. :)
Posted by Brock, 23:22, 20th January 2004:
 
Blimey, gobbo. You really know how to party on your birthday, don't you?

you ANIMAL you!
Posted by gobbo, 08:39, 21st January 2004:
 
Hahaha, you are right, im sad. I didnt do anything on my actual BIRTH day, but will be this weekend ;)
Posted by gobbo, 08:46, 21st January 2004:
 
Besides

1: This thread was meant to be about the programs, not my birthday

2: If you are refering to my non-drinking birthday, you try finding something to do in Reading for the non-drinker! Its the darkest most boring spot on Earth.
Posted by jlittle, 09:33, 21st January 2004:
 
I think Cal would prefer to see me using DirectX, but I hate it. Microsoft made it. Need I say more?

What operating system do you use? What browser do you use? As much as you may dislike Microsoft you can't take the fact away that 99% of people use their products so when coding you really shouldn't let personal opinions get in the way.

Just my 2p.
Posted by gobbo, 09:40, 21st January 2004:
 
Fair enough, but DirectX is so long winded, OpenGL is much more friendly and quicker to get into.

I wasnt so much commenting on Microsoft's other stuff, just DirectX.
Posted by gobbo, 10:28, 21st January 2004:
 
Also what you were saying about the windowing Cal, I can only think that the speed is a hardware related issue which is something Ill have to look into because it seems to run fine on the machines ive tested them on, but Ill make them fullscreen from now on :)
Posted by Victor Menendez, 10:30, 21st January 2004:
 
Time for you to go on apostrophe safari.
Posted by cal, 12:47, 21st January 2004:
 
the windowing thing is related is video memory. you need alot spare to start running opengl apps as well as driving the windows desktop.

as for just because it's microsoft - err, correct me if i'm wrong, but you're writing the apps for a microsoft platform anyway.
Posted by cal, 12:50, 21st January 2004:
 
why do you compile all your apps as console apps? it means you end up with a stray console window after quitting the main app window
Posted by gobbo, 13:06, 21st January 2004:
 
First of all yes im writing it for windows, but the DirectX code is hideous.

And secondly, the consoles help for outputting information whilst I'm coding and I forgot to add the code to stop them.

So, from now on, they shall be fullscreen without console windows :)
Posted by cruelemort, 13:27, 21st January 2004:
 
Gobbo you appear to only include the glut32.dll library, i thought that was platform independent, not just for windows. It is the glaux libs etc that are only for windows.
Posted by Liandle, 13:41, 21st January 2004:
 
...*naughtily pulling on boys shirtsleeves* ...stop working! come and PLAAYY!
Posted by Brock, 13:42, 21st January 2004:
 
Why would anybody wear just sleeves?

And how do you put clothes on 'naughtily'?
Posted by gobbo, 13:56, 21st January 2004:
 
And why would a lady want to go and pull some sleeves and not a man? Or a woman if she is that way inclined.

cruelemort, I include glut32.dll because sometimes it throws a little paddy if it can't find it and it's just easy to include it instead of mucking about :D
Posted by Saltation, 29th November 2007:
 
While we're on the topic of graphics simulations, today's New Scientist has a great article on how their technology is getting so much closer to reality that it is starting to be used for real-world applications

my favourite is the Got Milk? sidebar where a food technology company essentially inverted the Shrek II Milk II algorithm to allow non-invasive quality testing of milk, yoghurt, ice cream etc. by bouncing a "LAYzerrr" off the milk and comparing the actual lighting with the simulated lighting.

technology.newscientist.com...

stand-out quote:
"This work has been an eye-opener," [the researcher] says. "I thought that computer graphics were very simple - you sit down and it's a lot of nerds. I was very surprised that there was a lot of science behind it."
Compliments aside...