Indeed, getting some of the SSE work from Qt 3D into Gui could be useful as well.
When it comes to 3rd party solutions, the graphics stack would most likely be fine and happy with using glm (and so math3d could just go away), but that would mean pulling in more 3rd party dependencies, which is not necessarily ideal either. (in any case, that's a topic to be discussed separately) And yes, Eigen is probably a good example of something Qt should not be pretending to be competing with. Cheers, Laszlo -----Original Message----- From: Mike Krus <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2020 5:03 PM To: Konstantin Tokarev <[email protected]> Cc: Laszlo Agocs <[email protected]>; Konstantin Shegunov <[email protected]>; Jaroslaw Kobus <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Development] Moving math3d classes from GUI to CORE > On 23 Jan 2020, at 14:36, Konstantin Tokarev <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 23.01.2020, 15:56, "Laszlo Agocs" <[email protected]>: >> 4. Longer term, let's rather focus the energy on improving performance (via >> SSE, NEON) in math3d, as that would probably bring more benefits to Qt Quick >> and Quick 3D than spending effort on trying to get QtCore compete with >> existing linear algebra solutions out there. > > FWIW, "existing linear algebra solutions" like Eigen already implement SIMD > support for many CPU architectures. as does Qt3D Mike > -- > Regards, > Konstantin > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development — Mike Krus | [email protected] | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (UK) Ltd., a KDAB Group company Tel: UK Office +44 1625 809908 Mobile +44 7833 491941 KDAB - The Qt Experts, C++, OpenGL Experts _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
