Slashdot Mirror
Programmer Unveils OpenGL Bindings for Bash (opensource.com)
Slashdot reader silverdirk writes: Compiled languages have long provided access to the OpenGL API, and even most scripting languages have had OpenGL bindings for a decade or more. But, one significant language missing from the list is our old friend/nemesis Bash. But worry no longer! Now you can create your dazzling 3D visuals right from the comfort of your command line!
"You'll need a system with both Bash and OpenGL support to experience it firsthand," explains software engineer Michael Conrad, who created the first version 13 years ago as "the sixth in a series of 'Abuse of Technology' projects," after "having my technical sensibilities offended that someone had written a real-time video game in Perl.
"Back then, my primary language was C++, and I was studying OpenGL for video game purposes. I declared to my friends that the only thing worse would be if it had been 3D and written in Bash. Having said the idea out loud, it kept prodding me, and I eventually decided to give it a try to one-up the 'awfulness'..."
"You'll need a system with both Bash and OpenGL support to experience it firsthand," explains software engineer Michael Conrad, who created the first version 13 years ago as "the sixth in a series of 'Abuse of Technology' projects," after "having my technical sensibilities offended that someone had written a real-time video game in Perl.
"Back then, my primary language was C++, and I was studying OpenGL for video game purposes. I declared to my friends that the only thing worse would be if it had been 3D and written in Bash. Having said the idea out loud, it kept prodding me, and I eventually decided to give it a try to one-up the 'awfulness'..."
imagine Fortune at 60 fps with 16x SOAA, God rays on Ultra and hair works. It would be glorious.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I thought that the Gtk Server allowed one to use GtkGlArea in scripts.
Ezekiel 23:20
In the hands of responsible programmers. But what happens if you need to run a bash script from a character based console?
Too many simple utilities have morphed from: Here's a command-line tool, and here's an optional graphical UI that runs on top of it. Next, we'll merge the graphics right into the basic tool's codebase. So you need to link every hair-brained graphics lib to build it. Finally, the damned thing will refuse to run (even if you use all the text-only command line switches) if it can't find a bitmapped display.
Have gnu, will travel.
Command-line ads are coming
lucm, indeed.
Just imagine what 3D games would be like if they could be written in CMD batch language!
Or greater than 2.0 with shaders?
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Now lets see you do that in COBOL.
Of course! A PICTURE really should be a 3D picture, In EPCDIC of course.
A dingo ate my sig...
doesn't mean you should.
I mean if I was trying to make a joke about a C++ developer making shell scripts, I'd have used something like that.
I mean seriously, you don't write built-in commands for that. You create a specialized language and write an interpreter for it. Once you have that, you can easily access it from the shell.
You know how when you see the phrase for the first time in your life and you immediately realize how you have been missing this from your language for 30 years?
This is one of such phrases:
"comfort of my command line".
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
Its called Blender, though it's "Python" and not "BASH." Matter of fact, a most of Linux programs have a headless mode. https://docs.blender.org/manua....
I might actually have a use for this. I'm part of a team developing scientific simulation software... we work a lot at the command-line and it is handy to be able to visualize solutions/inputs quickly. We have many tools for visualization - but having something built right into the command-line _might_ be useful (huge emphasis on *might*!).
I'll definitely check it out...
I come here to read angry Americans telling other angry Americans how stupid they are
It's self evident at this point.
https://code.google.com/archiv...
I don't know fish but judging from what I've read here (https://www.slant.co/versus/523/1602/~zsh_vs_fish) I'm not convinced. The only benefit over zsh I really find good is a (supposedly) good default config. But I've configured zsh years ago and I'm still using that very efficient configuration today. That's what I call return of investment. Yes, it is not 100% intuitive to configure zsh but it's got a helpful community. I've even written my own completion extensions, so how hard can it be?
Calling zsh obsolete garbage implies you have not really used it.