[ODE] Proposal: Change Heightfield Origin

[Martijn Buijs]

David Walters wrote:
> Would it be desirable or undesirable for a change to be made such that
> the heightfield is positioned and rotated around the centre of it's
> X/Z extents at zero height? It wouldn't be a particular major task to
> change this, but it would obviously affect anyone currently using this
> new primitive.
> 
> Anyway, it seems more consistent to me as all of the other placeable
> primitives work using an origin at the centre, and personally would
> work out better for the project i'm currently working on (which is
> merely the motivation for this initial proposal).

Jason wrote:
 > Consistency is good, I'd like this change. It will also help newbies,
 > who will certainly be expecting the origin at the center of the map.

While I agree that it would be more consistent compared with other primitives, I'm against it for 
two reasons:
1) I believe it actually complicates things, and it is easy to apply the offset manually anyway.
2) I think neither origin is 'correct' (or wrong), therefor I suggest we keep it as simple as 
possible (the way it is now).

Or perhaps we can make this optional somehow?

Reminds me of something else, I think the we should make the 'float' data path 
precision-independent. If you are building with double precision, you need to pass the heightfield 
data as doubles, which is rather undesirable (my mistake really).

Martijn