float / double support in Python?

[Brandon Van Every]

Andrew Dalke wrote:
>
> (As an interesting note, scientific graphics programming tends to be
> different from games programming.  For example, we almost never
> use textures for anything and instead use a lot of triangles.

I hate texturing.  I'm a "zillions of triangles" kind of guy.
Micropolygonalization is certainly a valid direction for realistic
rendering, and it's a trajectory the HW may yet go in.  But the current
trajectory is still texture mapping and the 10 pixel triangle.  When I tile
my planet at the level of simulation I'd really prefer, I can't even see the
triangles.  Like I care about per-pixel shading, when I can't even see the
per-vertex shading!

> The problems in this subdomain of 3D graphics programming are
> not double/float size/performance but flexibility and being able
> to get a visualization system which handles the specific needs of the
> specific subdomain.  (Eg, crystallographers use different techniques
> than dockers, who use different techniques than folders.)

Ok, fine.  You're right, and I knew you were right in the first place.  I
just elided "3D game developer" to "3D graphics programmer" somewhere along
the way.  Game programmers still want their floats.

Does that make Python "future looking?"  Or just lazy?  It's going to be 5
years before anyone proposes doing away with floats in DirectX or consumer
3D HW.

> You state that "3D graphics programmers are going to knock Python
> for this until it's fixed."  That is incorrect, as there are many 3D
> graphics
> programmers who have decided Python is worth changing over, perhaps
> with some C/C++ code for the more intense parts.

Ok, 3D game programmers are going to knock Python for its lack of floats
until either Python fixes it, or floats become obsolete on consumer 3D HW.

--
Cheers,                         www.3DProgrammer.com
Brandon Van Every               Seattle, WA

20% of the world is real.
80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.