openSceneGraph under D ?

[Bill Baxter]

I certainly won't argue with you about porting OSG to D.  That would be 
one hell of a job.

But it seems like for C++, OpenSceneGraph is still a pretty good option.

--bb

Tristam MacDonald wrote:
> I don't deny that it is well managed, and even well designed. But I find 
> it suffers from a rather 'monolithic' philosophy (how many distinct 
> database formats are really useful in one app?). It also has a more 
> immediate issue as regards to porting to D, namely that the platform 
> interface for every platform (and API) is a separate module, each 
> written in the native language and API - which would require us to 
> maintain all of them.
> 
> It also relies heavily on community plugins to provide advanced 
> functionality, and these are very varied in quality and completeness, 
> and would also have to be ported separately - this includes most of the 
> windowing toolkits, physics integration, terrain support and character 
> animation toolkits.


> 
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> Tristam MacDonald wrote:
>>> Given the size and complexity of OSG, I don't think any automated 
>>> solution is going to be sufficient. besides, while OSG is quite 
>>> handy, they made some rather dubious design decisions, and it doesn't 
>>> feel very nice. 
>>
>> Really?  Like what?  I haven't seriously looked at OSG for years, but 
>> I was under the impression that it was one of the better managed and 
>> designed open source projects out there.
>>
>> --bb