PureBasic Forums - English

void wrote:

IceSoft wrote:It will be delivered like the MP3D engine.
A binary release with some demos (also binaries) and with lot of example codes.

That's unfortunate. I was hoping to be able to use this, but I suppose I'll have to put together my own solution.

Sorry I do not understand you. The Chipmunk4PB wrapper is a static libray written in C++ which wrap the whole C function from the Chipmunk physics engine. You can use the wrapped function like an original Chipmunk C function together with PureBasic.

Maybe you have to see some examples first before you be unhappy with my solution.

IceSoft wrote:

void wrote:

IceSoft wrote:It will be delivered like the MP3D engine.
A binary release with some demos (also binaries) and with lot of example codes.

That's unfortunate. I was hoping to be able to use this, but I suppose I'll have to put together my own solution.

Sorry I do not understand you. The Chipmunk4PB wrapper is a static libray written in C++ which wrap the whole C function from the Chipmunk physics engine. You can use the wrapped function like an original Chipmunk C function together with PureBasic.

I'm trying to minimize the number of binary-only things I'm interacting with in my projects. At the moment, that list consists of only the PureBasic compiler. The Chipmunk physics engine itself is open source, so my long-term solution is almost certainly going to be to do my own PB bindings for Chipmunk.

IceSoft wrote:Maybe you have to see some examples first before you be unhappy with my solution.

Examples won't address my concerns, I'm afraid.

void wrote:The Chipmunk physics engine itself is open source, so my long-term solution is almost certainly going to be to do my own PB bindings for Chipmunk.

Yes that is a good idea. One more binding is an improvement for all (Chipmunk and PureBasic).

IceSoft wrote:

void wrote:The Chipmunk physics engine itself is open source, so my long-term solution is almost certainly going to be to do my own PB bindings for Chipmunk.

Yes that is a good idea. One more binding is an improvement for all (Chipmunk and PureBasic).

I'm pretty close to ready to publish my preliminary results with chipmunk 6.x so far. Not just the wrapper itself, but the methodology; it's been a heck of a learning experience.

I haven't tested it for sure yet on platforms aside from x86 windows, but I believe this will be usable on both windows and macOS, 32-bit and 64-bit. It's a mixture of PureBasic and plain C, with a heck of a lot of auto-generated stuff.

And oh, so many mistakes I've made along the way...

But as of this moment in time, I'm successfully getting the simulation going, able to add entities and collision callbacks.. It's hard to measure performance, since my test framework seems to be hitting on graphics performance quirks in PureBasic. (and anyway, the Chipmunk library itself is still compiled debug for now)

void wrote:I'm pretty close to ready to publish my preliminary results with chipmunk 6.x so far. Not just the wrapper itself, but the methodology; it's been a heck of a learning experience.

Thanks. I am very interest about your result.

If you want to see my posts on my struggles so far, you can find them here (part 1) and here (part 2).

Warning, strong opinions therein. :)

I want to get things to a more polished/validated state before posting anything for people to use, although I do have one of my test applications on dropbox here.

This is an x86 windows binary that does nothing special except put 8000 objects on the screen, and do some 'world wrapping' at screen edges. The circles do collide with each other, though it's hard to tell.

void wrote:This is an x86 windows binary that does nothing special except put 8000 objects on the screen, and do some 'world wrapping' at screen edges. The circles do collide with each other, though it's hard to tell.

Hello void,
Can I get the PureBassic Source code for comparing the performance between your gcc and my VisualStudio compiler settings?
A PM is also welcome.

Thanks
Icesoft

IceSoft wrote:Can I get the PureBassic Source code for comparing the performance between your gcc and my VisualStudio compiler settings?
A PM is also welcome.

I suppose so. My current testbed code is pretty hideous, though. I'll send both the .pb and the .pbi code in a PM.

@void,

I have adapt it and it works different.
My chipmunk wrapper creates a border. Your wrapper does it not.
Hope I can send the sources today afternoon.

Hello IceSoft,
your website is gone:

chipmunk4purebasic.freeforums.org was removed for inactivity on Dec 16, 2012.

Got another one? Or will you rebuild it?

Greetings

Pforzheimer wrote:Hello IceSoft,
your website is gone:

chipmunk4purebasic.freeforums.org was removed for inactivity on Dec 16, 2012.

Got another one? Or will you rebuild it?

Greetings

Try www.dreifrankensoft.de (this will be a new start with my own domain)