Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

steg

d3dx - who uses this?

This topic is 6502 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Hi all, I know there is already posts about this, but I was wondering how many people use this layer? I''ve delved with it and it seems pretty good, especially the math stuff for planes, quaternions, vectors and matices. So, cmon guys, do you use it? Thanks, Steve You can achieve anything if you want it badly enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Well, Im using it now for 3 reasons
1.-development speed.
2.-No one is complaining about it, au contraire everybody seems to be quite happy with it.
3.-Right now at this point, doing things at hand is somehow hard, after all is almost a completely new API, and some things are "tricky" to get them working just right, plus there are some VERY nice extras like skin meshing, vertex shading, pixel shading, vertex blending, texture and mesh loading and some other cool stuff already coded in.

However... you must remember D3DX is basically a wrapper for D3D meaning you no longer have absolute control of every aspect of the process, and there is NOTHING in it you cant do by using straight D3D, for some this is more than enough for not to use it.

Plus it may seem more "profesional" to do your own wrapper, Im not quite sure about that since d3dx may be simple to use Once you know what function/member/property does what, but that is a bit more complicated than it seems, after all, the Only available documentation for it is the Help files that come with the SDK and although they are very good (ms excel this time with them) , they are not really "newbie" friendly.

Take into account that if you decide not to use D3DX it will literary take some months to be up to par with D3DX. BUT it may just be worth it.

So any way you slice it, you are in for some trouble if you take this path, so choose your destiny and choose wisely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
D3DX functions are quick, already done, and pretty sure to work (I''m sure the MS engineers spent some time debugging them.)

I''d assume they were pretty efficient too. . . they don''t seem to kitchen sink any of the functions (seems like everything has its own function.)

But i suppose if you''re an absolutely speed freak, there are some optimizations -- for example, many math functions return the exact same pointer that was passed into it.

For example:

D3DXMatrixRotationAxis(&matRotate, &m_vRef, fAmount);
the value of &matRotate is passed out as a return value!

Not exactly a huge waste of space or time but. . .

DmGoober

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like the math functions but why the redundancy between d3d and d3dx for example:

IDirect3DDevice8::CreateTexture();
D3DXCreateTexture();

But they did clean up the interfaces of d3d8 which is nice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
has sb benchmarked some functions of d3d & d3dx?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks guys for your comments. I will use d3dx for the math portion and of course the loading of textures/meshes.

Regards,
Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!