[ODE] PosR - a better way?

[Megan Fox]

Ditto.  Those geoms that I do have as composites with bodies are
almost always complex enough that either the GeomTransforms make it
harder than it should be (hierarchies) or make me end up jumping
through additional hoops just to make it all work (rigid bodies, like
weapon collision shapes, attached to said hierarchies).

The simple case that ODE is designed for, boxes and cruft on the
ground, are actually pretty limited in my case - and besides which,
the changes suggested wouldn't matter much as far as they're concerned
anyways, they'd be dead-easy to port over.

Not to sound like a gloomy, whiny person, though, ODE is FAR ahead of
Tokamak in this realm.  There, almost EVERYTHING was aimed at a
physics demo, whereas with ODE, it seems like there's just this one
remaining bit of bias.

-Megan Fox

> I agree with this too. In my case, the vast majority of my geoms do
> not have bodies associated with them (static scenery), so the current
> body-geom integration doesn't do much for me anyway.  I'd rather have
> separate transforms and stop using GeomTransform.
> 
> Jason
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ODE mailing list
> ODE at q12.org
> http://q12.org/mailman/listinfo/ode
>