Just saw Chandler's tweet about Cinder and it looks great! Congratulations for launching. I'm a pretty avid Processing user that has used openFrameworks a few times. How do Cinder and openFrameworks compare and contrast?
I think this would be useful information in order to gauge which is appropriate where.
Hey Jono - this is obviously a pretty complicated question, and largely a matter of opinion, but if you would like to read a few thoughts on the topic expressed in an interview with Create Digital Motion, you can do so here:
Right off the bat, I'm glad that you're targeting Visual C++. MS's IDEs are always the best, IMO. Code::Blocks and what I've seen of XCode don't hold a candle to the Microsoft's debugging capabilities (and therefore faster development time). Nice one.
Reading that article, I saw that you want to implement a DirectX backend. Would be nice to use HLSL as opposed to GLSL. I feel it's a much more powerful shading language that I've yet to see really applied to generative art type pieces.
Love 'em or hate 'em, MS does know how to make an IDE, and VC++ being the most popular C++ environment in the world made that an easy choice. However if someone would like to work on adding Code::Blocks support, we would absolutely be open to it.
When we do add DX support, we definitely intend to include HLSL support. Cinder is designed so no APIs are baked in to places they shouldn't be, so adding this should be possible without modifying much existing Cinder code. The one area I am aware of that breaks this rule (and there may be others I am overlooking) is qtime::MovieGl, which needs to be moved to a separate module eventually. We will also add qtime::MovieDx since QuickTime on Windows actually supports a hardware accelerated D3D path, surprisingly enough. If someone has extensive DX experience and would be up for undertaking this earlier, absolutely let us know.
Thanks for the comment Andrew. Having read the article and also looking through the website more in-depth I'm really excited to test this and go through Hodgin's tutorials.
I know it's open sourced on github so virtually anything is possible, but do you have a roadmap of stuff you'd like or plan to implement? Long term, mid term, and short term would be great to see the direction you guys continue to go.
Hey - thanks :). To be honest, I am embarrassed to say that we don't yet have an official roadmap. Part of the idea is to let people start playing with Cinder, and see what they want, what problems they discover and then find out what other people know about or are interested enough in to contribute.
What kind of things would you like to see on the roadmap?
I bubble this post to talk a little about the roadmap. Cinder is out for all of us for a bit more than a month right now and community is growing, not only people who uses it but people who is developing for it.
Maybe it is time to start to make a kind of roadmap. I am not talking about something very official, maybe just a simple list could work. For example, essential points for me may be
Cinder lacks and priorities. What does cinder need and how important is it?
What is currently developing and who is doing it?
Feature requests in the core of cinder.
At least this is will give us an idea about what people are working on, what will be made and where people can help.
What do you think?
Leave a comment on hector.spc's reply
Change topic type
Link this topic
Provide the permalink of a topic that is related to this topic