L B

Cookie Engine. CookE.

So LE2 doesn't exist?! Lies, all my life?

Seal of approval? How do I get it?!

The more I read, the less I like any of them.

Erhm, remember this is the Leadwerks3D forum, not LE2!

That would mean Leadwerks3D to support WebGL, that is, web browsers, am I right? I'd tend to say it's impossible at first, judging by the risky nature of executing a DLL, but I'm mighty curious how Unity does it. They do have a web player install though, right? In that case, you'd have to make plugins for these browsers, I think that'd be the simplest way.

+1

Yummy.

Would it be repetitive to say "Yummy."? Except for that cheesy music, of course.

I get the System::AddHook method. The first line was the definition, and the second an example, right? What I don't understand is the ProcessEvent method. Also, I suggest Application instead of App. First, App is connotated with iOS applications, or at least Mac applications, which is not platform neutral. Second, the engine doesn't use other abbreviations elsewhere, except when extremely often used (e.g. Vec for Vector).

Yummy.

Oh lory, I thought I was in the C# forum, and now I'm assaulted with pointers. I must have gotten lost!

Seriously, if there wasn't Skyrim, I'd be having a lot of trouble waiting for L3D.

Yes, this is a valid point for a generalization. But not in our case. Static methods exist in C++, and Lua, so they are as valid as a global method. In any case, the only way to expose a DllExport is through procedural calls. This will then be reconverted to OO calls by whichever language wrapper (note that Lua is an exception, with Lua++ and whatnot developed for it, I think). From LE2, I can tell you this hasn't drained even 1 FPS from me, ever. Then you agree, with the static method, they'll be documented. Yay. Everyone happy.

Off topic: Is it a coincidence that "Rimfrost Software" has the same initials as "Roland Stralberg"?

C#/.NET with Leadwerks3D will be supported in an OOP way occifially. There will not be just the DllImport header, but an officially supported class OOP wrapper, like LEO or Leadwerks .NET for LE 2. This is because Leadwerks3D is made to be OOP by design, and not procedural, and the default commandset will be documented in an OOP way. So this discussion is about how to officially support, in the OOP wrapper, the global methods. Did I say I liked the static class approach?

Yes and no. Remember the Leadwerks API has to work with C++, C, Lua and who knows what other language, which don't all have an easy FileReader available. And the rest of your post, e.g. classifying "LogToConsole" in a "Logger" class boils down to what I asked Josh, but his concern was that there would be too many undocumented top classes (remember, Logger wouldn't be documented). So instead, I suggested that these static classes were built right into the C++/Lua version, so they'd be consistent with C#, Java and whatever other language. It seems like the best solution so far. See this wiki page: http://www.leadwerks.com/newwiki/index.php?title=Static_Functions

Vector based GUI, yummy. Meanwhile, let's just get huge images and downscale.

Static functions are the way to go. I throw away all the other arguments from our 1 hour long debate, just use static functions.

This is marked as [sOLVED]; how did you solve it?

Will you fix the bug or not?

In a real-life scenario, you can attach an elephant to a rope with a strong metal joint. it won't "vibrate" and go "unstable" if the joint is strong enough.

Erhm, ok, 2.51?

That's weird, never occured to me. I run W7 Aero DWM.

Mmm, built-in Sculptris terrain... That would be killer.