{"id":61,"date":"2015-05-15T19:43:38","date_gmt":"2015-05-15T19:43:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.qubekwest.com\/?p=61"},"modified":"2016-04-14T18:34:19","modified_gmt":"2016-04-14T18:34:19","slug":"mathd","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.qubekwest.com\/?p=61","title":{"rendered":"Math’d"},"content":{"rendered":"

Once I managed to get an entirely unimaginative red 2D triangle or three onto the screen in a few different ways, I knew that I had to expand into the 3rd dimension. \u00a0To that end, I dropped back to a single 3D triangle, left it red, and prepared myself for what should be on the screen. \u00a0A couple seconds of compiling and firing up the program revealed that while the triangle was in fact on my screen, it looked no different from my 2D version.<\/p>\n

This is simply because by default OpenGL happily ignores the Z-Axis entirely. \u00a0In the old fixed pipeline days, you could probably fix that by simply setting some configuration value or other to one that makes 3D stuff happen. \u00a0In the fancy new shader pipeline you need to tell the card how to do that. \u00a0That means passing a few matrices down with all of your fun geometry. \u00a0In English, that means you need to tell the card how to use the Z-axis.<\/p>\n

In one of the books I’m reading it was mentioned that OpenGL “is not a math library.” \u00a0This is especially true with LWJGL. \u00a0In C\/C++ you can use the library mentioned by the book called vmath. \u00a0In Java you are on your own. \u00a0This fact has sent me down the multi-week long detour of crafting a math package of my own and making sure the tests for it prove it behaves the way math should.<\/p>\n

The current list of things in my math library are as follows:<\/p>\n