Re: [boost] [gsoc-2013] Physics Library Abstraction Layer

Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc-2013] Physics Library Abstraction Layer
From: Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. (jeffrey.hellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-12 01:44:51

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Michael Marcin <mike.marcin_at_[hidden]>wrote:

> Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
>
>>
>> What do you mean by "colliders"? You mean rigid bodies? Or something more
>> general?
>>
>>
> Sorry my physics is a bit rusty, I'm not sure.
>
> A rigid body in Unity at least (which uses PhysX under the hood) typically
> has a collider.
> http://docs.unity3d.com/**Documentation/Manual/Physics.**html
>

>
> I believe collision primitives is what most libraries call what I was
> talking about.
> See newton for instance:
> http://newtondynamics.com/**wiki/index.php5?title=**Collision_primitives
>

Ah, okay.

>
> This sounds like you're focusing the scope of this on rigid body
>> simulations, which is fine, just that, ya know, there's quite a bit more
>> to
>> physics simulation engines :)
>>
>> [1] http://physbam.stanford.edu/
>>
>>
> Indeed.
>
> I've never heard of physbam before but looking over it I think it has a
> similar set of abstractions to most of the other physics libraries I've
> come across.
>
> Formalizing these shared aspects into concepts and creating an elegant
> interface with multiple backend bindings is what I would hope a boost
> physics library would accomplish.
>

Hmmm...this sounds like you have something similar to Boost.Multiprecision
in mind. Is that accurate?

- Jeff