[osg-users] request for small change in StandardShadowMap.cpp

[Trajce Nikolov NICK]

Hi Robert,

thanks for the reply. Well, I spent quite a good amount of time to
understand how it works and it all points to the StandardShadowMap, the
call I posted. This shadowmap technique allows you to attach shaders to it
through the interface, but the program is set localy again for a local
_stateset that is pushed through the CullVisitor in a cull stage. All I
need is reference to this local instance of the Program. Perhaps, maybe
introduce a method getProgram() which again will not hurt anyone.

Also, I can not think of any special reason to specialize the traverse call
to osg::Group then forbid the extension ....

Any further thoughts?

Nick

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 6:50 PM, Robert Osfield <robert.osfield at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Nick,
>
> I haven't worked with osgShadow for over a year so it's not fresh in
> my mind.  There are mechanisms for override the state management in
> osgShadow but I don't recall how widely they are implemented amongst
> the shadow techniques.
>
> With the proposed change, with the explicit osg::Group::traverse()
> method there must be a reason why this was done but without a code
> review and trawl through the svn logs I can't provide the answer.  In
> general overriding the management of osg::Program and other
> osg::StateSet setting shouldn't require lots of hacks, so if a
> particular ShadowTechnique is failing in this respect then perhaps
> this needs looking at.
>
> Robert.
>
>
> Robert.
>
> On 1 May 2015 at 17:15, Trajce Nikolov NICK
> <trajce.nikolov.nick at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Robert,
> >
> > I posted a while ago a question how to get the osg::Program associated
> with
> > the shaders from the StandardShadowMap in order to extend. And it is
> localy
> > defined as you can see in the code. However I found a workaround, by
> > extending the ShadowingScene and catch the StateSet from the Cull
> traversal.
> > But, this will not work since the line below. Here is my proposed
> change, it
> > will not hurt anyone I think - these ShadowMap* classes are
> > over-encapsulated in my opinion.
> >
> > void StandardShadowMap::ViewData::cullShadowReceivingScene( )
> >
> > {
> >
> >     _cv->pushStateSet( _stateset.get() );
> >
> >
> > #if 0
> >
> >     _st->getShadowedScene()->osg::Group::traverse( *_cv );
> >
> > #else
> >
> >     _st->getShadowedScene()->traverse( *_cv );
> >
> > #endif
> >
> >
> >     _cv->popStateSet();
> >
> > }
> >
> >
> > It will be nice if this forcing of osg::Group::traverse is replaced by
> > ordinary traverse thus anyone can re-write and extend. What you think?
> >
> >
> > Please let me know and thanks a bunch as always!
> >
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> > --
> > trajce nikolov nick
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > osg-users mailing list
> > osg-users at lists.openscenegraph.org
> >
> http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> osg-users mailing list
> osg-users at lists.openscenegraph.org
> http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
>



-- 
trajce nikolov nick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openscenegraph.org/pipermail/osg-users-openscenegraph.org/attachments/20150501/89c744bb/attachment-0003.htm>