Does anyone know of an documentation on the Bullet algorithms that are written in layman's terms? I just want to understand the basics of how it simulates cloth, rigid bodies, and collisions. For example, does it use a simple mass/spring mesh model, does the collision detection use simple bounding boxes or actual mesh collisions, what to do each of the input parameters mean and what do they do, stuff like that.
All I can find is stuff for programmers, and I have no clue what they're talking about.
Thanks for the help.
Bullet in Laymans Terms
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 12:09 am
Re: Bullet in Laymans Terms
Sorry, it's been recognized by the community for quite a long time that the doxygen documentation is quite lacking (http://bulletphysics.org/Bullet/phpBB3/ ... f=9&t=2490).
You're going to have to look at the actual code and learn the terms used to figure out what Bullet is doing. It's a great learning experience, actually. If you just can't figure something out, you can always ask on the forums.
You're going to have to look at the actual code and learn the terms used to figure out what Bullet is doing. It's a great learning experience, actually. If you just can't figure something out, you can always ask on the forums.
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 9:23 pm
Re: Bullet in Laymans Terms
Thanks, but really I'm just a user trying to understand how it works so I don't waste a lot of time doing stuff that Bullet doesn't like. And generally, I'd prefer to know how something works if I'm going to use it. But I guess that's just me...
I'm certainly not going to try to reverse engineer some C++ code to figure it out. Partly because I haven't touched C++ in many years, and partly because I probably couldn't reverse engineer it with much success if I tried.
But thanks for responding.
I'm certainly not going to try to reverse engineer some C++ code to figure it out. Partly because I haven't touched C++ in many years, and partly because I probably couldn't reverse engineer it with much success if I tried.
But thanks for responding.