translations are at m12,13,14 i just checked
you can pass them with glUniform* with false in the transpose parameter

btw. if you want to make your own little matrix lib, i heartily recommend it
lots of little mini-functions in the class that can do alot less flops than constantly multiplying entire matrices together
eg. translateXZ, translateXYZ, and so on.

You can put the translation along the last row or column, depending on your conventions. Note the distinction between row/column majorness and row/column vectors. Dx and GL's matrix uploading functions expect the matrices to be stored in a given majorness so as long as you comply, you can use any combination of row/column vectors stored in row/column major (although both APIs will transpose your matrices for you if you specify it, at least GL does to my knowledge).

You can put the translation along the last row or column, depending on your conventions. Note the distinction between row/column majorness and row/column vectors. Dx and GL's matrix uploading functions expect the matrices to be stored in a given majorness so as long as you comply, you can use any combination of row/column vectors stored in row/column major (although both APIs will transpose your matrices for you if you specify it, at least GL does to my knowledge).

yes, that's the transpose parameter in the glUniformMatrix* functions
default is the one i specified in the other post, and is likely a faster upload to gpu since it would be a bit block transfer

[s]you mean the last element?
its calculated like this:
element[15] += element[3] * x + element[7] * y + element[11] * z

the reason for += is because you also add element[15] * w, but here we assume w to be 1.0f

so... if you are only translating x and y, then z would be 0, and thus:
element[15] += element[3] * x + element[7] * y[/s]

nevermind, i just noticed you said -Rotate-XY
let's see....

in this code sx is sin(x), sy is sin(y), and cx is cos(x), finally cy is cos(y)


// left vector
m_Element[0] = cy;
m_Element[1] = sx * sy;
m_Element[2] = -cx * sy;
m_element[3] = 0.0f; // w1

// up vector
m_Element[4] = 0.0f;
m_Element[5] = cx;
m_Element[6] = sx;
m_element[7] = 0.0f; // w2
// forward vector
m_Element[ 8] = sy;
m_Element[ 9] = -sx * cy;
m_Element[10] = cx * cy;
m_element[11] = 0.0f; // w3

// translation
m_element[12] = 0.0f; // tx
m_element[13] = 0.0f; // ty
m_element[14] = 0.0f; // tz
m_element[15] = 1.0f; // w4


i haven't really optimized this, and as you can see this only creates a 2D rotation matrix
i think it's probably best for each rotation to make a matrix and multiply together to make a complete transformation