Thread overview
dbox is a complete D2 port of the Box2D game physics library
May 23, 2014
Andrej Mitrovic
May 23, 2014
Piotrek
May 23, 2014
Andrej Mitrovic
May 24, 2014
Kiith-Sa
May 24, 2014
Andrej Mitrovic
Jun 16
aberba
Jun 18
aberba
Jun 18
aberba
May 23, 2014
https://github.com/d-gamedev-team/dbox

What is Box2D?
==============

Box2D[1] is an open source C++ physics engine used for simulating
rigid bodies in 2D. Box2D is developed by Erin Catto and is
zlib-licensed. Box2D is mainly used for game development and
interactive physics simulations.
Box2D is platform-independent and has no dependencies
other than its test-suite which requires the GLFW library.

[1] : http://box2d.org/about/

What is dbox?
==============

dbox[2] is a complete D2 port of the Box2D C++ library.
dbox targets the latest release of Box2D (currently at v2.3.1)
and includes a port of its GUI test-suite.
The test-suite includes over 50 unique and interactive examples
demonstrating the capabilities of the physics engine.

dbox is also a dub package which you can add to your build dependencies right away. See the dub project page[3] for more information.

[2] : https://github.com/d-gamedev-team/dbox
[3] : http://code.dlang.org/packages/dbox
May 23, 2014
Hi,


nice one.
How does it compare to C++ version in terms of performance?

Piotrek
May 23, 2014
On 5/24/14, Piotrek via Digitalmars-d-announce <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
> nice one.
> How does it compare to C++ version in terms of performance?

I haven't tested the performance yet! I'm definitely interested, but as usual I assume LDC will probably beat DMD in this area.
May 24, 2014
On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 22:52:53 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On 5/24/14, Piotrek via Digitalmars-d-announce
> <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
>> nice one.
>> How does it compare to C++ version in terms of performance?
>
> I haven't tested the performance yet! I'm definitely interested, but
> as usual I assume LDC will probably beat DMD in this area.

Do you intend to keep this a straight port or will it be open to modifications?


From a brief look at the source, it's possible I'll end up needing turning shapes
from classes to structs and/or hooking it up with a custom allocator. I expect to need to spawn/destroy objects of varying shapes very often. (I do plan to try the current version first, though; it may be good enough)

If I make such changes (which may affect the API, although the changes can probably be kept somewhat small), should I open a pull request or start a fork
(ddbox? ;p)?

(Same question applies to other of your ports)
May 24, 2014
On 5/24/14, Kiith-Sa via Digitalmars-d-announce <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
> Do you intend to keep this a straight port or will it be open to modifications?

I think we can create a new branch with API improvements and additions. I'm not sure what the state of dub support for this is, apparently branch-based dependencies are now deprecated? I hope we can do something like this:

# Use the direct C++ Port
"dependencies": { "dbox": ">=0.0.2", }

# Use a new D-ified interface which has more features "dependencies": { "dbox": "d_api:>=0.0.2", }

Can we do something like this already with dub?

Andrei's allocators could come in very handy. I'm still unsure how we can actually hook up a custom allocator, you can't really do things like "$ dmd -alias allocator = mymodule.myallocator".

As for actual behavioral changes, we better start adding unittests then. :)

Btw, there's a Contributions folder in the Box2D distribution which I haven't ported, it has some cool features like fluids support. I'm not sure if it's the same as the following video, but the stuff is cool: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKlkk3uCdJs

> From a brief look at the source, it's possible I'll end up
> needing turning shapes
> from classes to structs and/or hooking it up with a custom
> allocator.

I wanted to convert everything into structs, but the problem is the C++ library used inheritance and virtual methods even though in the end they end up using all of these objects as stack-allocated objects. I'm not sure whether we actually have to spawn a lot of shape objects though (AFAICT few of them ever get instantiated), but if that's true then converting these to structs might be beneficial.

>I expect to need to spawn/destroy objects of varying
> shapes very often. (I do plan to try the current version first,
> though; it may be good enough)

Good luck!

> If I make such changes (which may affect the API, although the
> changes can probably be kept somewhat small), should I open a
> pull request or start a fork
> (ddbox? ;p)?

We could create a new branch, but for the moment you're probably better off not writing any pull requests since I will be MIA for a while (I'm moving very soon). I'll keep you updated.

> (Same question applies to other of your ports)

Same answer! :)
June 16
On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 22:00:51 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> https://github.com/d-gamedev-team/dbox
>
> What is Box2D?
> ==============
>
> [...]

This sort of investment still amazes me.
June 17
On Tuesday, 16 June 2020 at 17:52:37 UTC, aberba wrote:
> On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 22:00:51 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>> https://github.com/d-gamedev-team/dbox
>>
>> What is Box2D?
>> ==============
>>
>> [...]
>
> This sort of investment still amazes me.

This is a 6 years old post though. I'm sure there are much better graphics libraries out there by now, including D ones.
June 18
On Wednesday, 17 June 2020 at 01:20:00 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On Tuesday, 16 June 2020 at 17:52:37 UTC, aberba wrote:
>> On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 22:00:51 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>>> https://github.com/d-gamedev-team/dbox
>>>
>>> What is Box2D?
>>> ==============
>>>
>>> [...]
>>
>> This sort of investment still amazes me.
>
> This is a 6 years old post though. I'm sure there are much better graphics libraries out there by now, including D ones.

Box2D? Its a physics engine.
June 18
On Thursday, 18 June 2020 at 14:38:27 UTC, aberba wrote:
> On Wednesday, 17 June 2020 at 01:20:00 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 16 June 2020 at 17:52:37 UTC, aberba wrote:
>>> On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 22:00:51 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>>>> https://github.com/d-gamedev-team/dbox
>>>>
>>>> What is Box2D?
>>>> ==============
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> This sort of investment still amazes me.
>>
>> This is a 6 years old post though. I'm sure there are much better graphics libraries out there by now, including D ones.
>
> Box2D? Its a physics engine.

And your name matches the author 😁. So I guess you know what it is. But Box2D itself is still used almost everywhere its need. And not port exists aside this.
June 19
On Thursday, 18 June 2020 at 14:38:27 UTC, aberba wrote:
> On Wednesday, 17 June 2020 at 01:20:00 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 16 June 2020 at 17:52:37 UTC, aberba wrote:
>>> On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 22:00:51 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>>>> https://github.com/d-gamedev-team/dbox
>>>>
>>>> What is Box2D?
>>>> ==============
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> This sort of investment still amazes me.
>>
>> This is a 6 years old post though. I'm sure there are much better graphics libraries out there by now, including D ones.
>
> Box2D? Its a physics engine.

Yes sorry about that I remembered it wrong. :)

Anyway I think it would be great to optimize it. If I recall right, there was a lot of GC usage in the port.