vujadin
MeshImpostor?
Hi. Do you know if there is any possibility with oimo to create a complex meshimpostor. I know that oimo.js, unlike canon.js, do not currently directly support meshimpostor. But maybe there is a possibility to create a custom complex body in oimo that can be pass as a parametter to the impostor? Is it possible to merge multiple PlaneImpostors into a single impostor for example? Else, do you plan on updating CanonHx based on the new version of canon.js one of these days or is the canon lib something you do not use anymore in your haxe projects?
I saw some Three.js demos in which complex mesh impostors were simulated with spheres (not very complex though...). I don't know about plane impostors, I think its impossible. About CannonJS, you just reminded me about my port of it to Haxe (different than https://github.com/vujadin/cannon.hx, written from scratch, never published...). It was way faster than the original (js build). If I remember right, I've created a demo based on Bunny demo from cannon.js examples where for cannon.js if a stacked only 2 bunnies one on top of another, as soon as they collided fps would go to 1FPS and the browser would choke, while in my version I was able to put about 15 bunnies on top of each other before fps would drop below 60. So I just might give it another shot. I remember well I couldn't make cpp build to work well with BabylonHx (it would build but the simulation was all messed up), so I gave up... But both Oimo and Cannon are good only for demos unfortunately. What I'm working on right now is integration of Bullet (Ammo) physics in BHx, and I'll make it default physics engine. It already works very well (for both cpp and js targets), here are some demos: http://babylonhx.com/demos/bullet2/ http://babylonhx.com/demos/bullet1/ http://babylonhx.com/demos/bulletvehicle/
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 5:02 PM, ramsestom [email protected] wrote:
Hi. Do you know if there is any possibility with oimo to create a complex meshimpostor. I know that oimo.js, unlike canon.js, do not currently directly support meshimpostor. But maybe there is a possibility to create a custom complex body in oimo that can be pass as a parametter to the impostor? Is it possible to merge multiple PlaneImpostors into a single impostor for example? Else, do you plan on updating CanonHx based on the new version of canon.js one of these days or is the canon lib something you do not use anymore in your haxe projects?
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/vujadin/OimoHx/issues/7, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AEbKmYTNXIaKTpHRFfl_o6tWsAO2r_g_ks5qLsJpgaJpZM4I1a8K .
The demos with bullet seems really promising :+1: . Is a first public release of bulletHx planned anytime soon? Concerning cannon.js I know the current version has much better performances than the one that was used to port cannonHx afew years ago. That is why I was wondering if you would update your port based on this new version or not. But if you already have ported bullet to haxe, I guess we don't need to have two different "complete" (oimo is good but too simple and lacks some functionalities for me) physics engine for babylonHx. So I guess I will try to achieve my goal with oimo for now and hope to be able to test bulletHx soon ;)
Its not a port but actual Bullet physics engine: http://bulletphysics.org/ I'm using https://github.com/luboslenco/haxebullet but with some modifications and with soft physics support. I'm trying to make unique api in BHx for both cpp and js. But with latest hxcpp and haxe 3.3.0 the code that worked is now broken (especially for cpp target) and I have to fix a lot of things... Also, some heavy changes are happening in BJs (the good ones https://github.com/BabylonJS/Babylon.js/pull/1185) which are not yet merged into bjs master branch but I've already started to implement them in BHx to be able to keep up with bjs. This unfortunately brings also a lot of problems that have to be solved so I can't promise when BHx with bullet physics support will be available.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:06 PM, ramsestom [email protected] wrote:
The demos with bullet seems really promising 👍 . Is a first public release of bulletHx planned anytime soon? Concerning cannon.js I know the current version has much better performances than the one that was used to port cannonHx afew years ago. That is why I was wondering if you would update your port based on this new version or not. But if you already have ported bullet to haxe, I guess we don't need to have two different "complete" (oimo is good but too simple and lacks some functionalities for me) physics engine for babylonHx. So I guess I will try to achieve my goal with oimo for now and hope to be able to test bulletHx soon ;)
— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/vujadin/OimoHx/issues/7#issuecomment-226000037, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AEbKmQyMHBremeYlrPpiKaEfcGUVDFa_ks5qLwnTgaJpZM4I1a8K .