Commentary on View architecture for Custom Views: Difference between revisions
From ParaQ Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
DaveDemarle (talk | contribs) (starting a page about views/representations and strategies so that we can figure out how to improve them) |
DaveDemarle (talk | contribs) (rough top level) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
ParaView 3's view/representation and strategy architecture is a great improvement over ParaView 2's render module architecture. But there is room for improvement, especially regarding the creation of custom views. The following describes what the weaknesses of the current architecture are and how some existing custom views are implemented. The purpose of this page is to tabulating this information so that our next design may be even stronger. | ParaView 3's view/representation and strategy architecture is a great improvement over ParaView 2's render module architecture. But there is room for improvement, especially regarding the creation of custom views. The following describes what the weaknesses of the current architecture are and how some existing custom views are implemented. The purpose of this page is to tabulating this information so that our next design may be even stronger. | ||
== Weaknesses == | |||
architecture complex, three independent class hierarchies (proxy definition, proxy, vtk) | |||
architecture not well documented | |||
hard to augment what is there without replacing everything | |||
== Example Custom Views == | |||
Manta: | |||
change to XML parsing to do targetted replacement of parent proxy's subproxies/properties from | |||
client side classes (GLRenderer) different from server (MantaRenderer) | |||
hacked IceT out to do composite and not use GL | |||
Static Streaming Applications Views: | |||
replacing behavior high up the ViewProxy class hierarchy without breaking them | |||
contained real view is controlled by parent view | |||
Others?: | |||
Revision as of 13:05, 23 April 2010
ParaView 3's view/representation and strategy architecture is a great improvement over ParaView 2's render module architecture. But there is room for improvement, especially regarding the creation of custom views. The following describes what the weaknesses of the current architecture are and how some existing custom views are implemented. The purpose of this page is to tabulating this information so that our next design may be even stronger.
Weaknesses
architecture complex, three independent class hierarchies (proxy definition, proxy, vtk)
architecture not well documented
hard to augment what is there without replacing everything
Example Custom Views
Manta:
change to XML parsing to do targetted replacement of parent proxy's subproxies/properties from
client side classes (GLRenderer) different from server (MantaRenderer)
hacked IceT out to do composite and not use GL
Static Streaming Applications Views:
replacing behavior high up the ViewProxy class hierarchy without breaking them
contained real view is controlled by parent view
Others?:
