Quote:
So as I understand it, you are now interested in fixing the Python bindings on the develop version of PolyVox, whereas previously you were using an older (master?) version of PolyVox where the bindings already partly worked?
Yes!
Quote:
If so then I would roughly try things in this order:
Comment out most of the SWIG code, leaving something simple (such as Vector) for testing.
Fix up the various paths from where I have moved folders around.
Get a RawVolume working with only int or float types (forget about Large/Paging/SimpleVolume for now).
Next come the surface extractors. These might be tricky - as usual the problem will be the template parameters and the fact that these are used to control the behaviour of the algorithm. Sadly I really don't know enough about SWIG to help much here.
this is what i'm doing, I stopped to the Surface extractor template classes... i think it is the crucial point.
Quote:
I should point out that there is an alternative approach which you might want to consider. Instead of fixing the SWIG/Python bindings you could write a set of simple C functions to wrap the PolyVox functionality which you need, and then you could expose these directly to Python. It would be less flexible but tailored to you use-case. Or perhaps a hybrid approach, these C wrappers might be useful for the surface extractors. Let me know if you want more information on how you might do this.
Could be an option B, i red in the Python docs something about (also blender use a lot C wrappers). First i will try with the SWIG approach, in case i fail i will seriuosly consider the B option.
Thank's for the help David, i will keep you informed,
Walter
