Difference Btwn Bullet & ODE Solver Code ...

[djwarder]

Hey there

I'm trying to learn more about HDK coding by going thru the ODE code that comes with Houdini, plus also looking at the open source Bullet code, but am getting confused as there seems to be alot of differences btwn the two. Apart from the obvious API differences, what is the best one to look at to implement a new solver, i.e which has the best practices and is most efficient? Also, any advice would be most appreciated ...

Cheers

Dan

[mightcouldb1]

Bullet has multithreading support, is faster, and use convex hulls for collision instead of primitive shapes.

[djwarder]

Bullet has multithreading support, is faster, and use convex hulls for collision instead of primitive shapes.

Yeah Bullet is great, very fast too! In terms of 'efficiency', I kinda meant in terms of code efficiency - i.e the ODE code is over twice as long as the Bullet code, but is written inhouse, so which one is the 'correct' reference to look at? Also, what is the best way to access all the transform data in DOPs via the HDK to fit into the whole DOPs environment and not break things?

[Ratman]

Bullet has multithreading support, is faster, and use convex hulls for collision instead of primitive shapes.

Actually Bullet is only multithreaded in 32bit and Cell processors right now, not 64bit.

As for the ODE and Bullet code, I'd recommend looking at the supplied ODE HDK code, mainly because it is more updated in terms of the API for DOPs, since the Bullet DOP stuff was originally built a version or 2 ago of Houdini.

Hope this helps.

[djwarder]

As for the ODE and Bullet code, I'd recommend looking at the supplied ODE HDK code, mainly because it is more updated in terms of the API for DOPs, since the Bullet DOP stuff was originally built a version or 2 ago of Houdini.

Cheers for the info, was wondering whether that was the case, plus guessed it might be more optimal if written inhouse. Will have to go thru the code & see if I can make head or tail of it!!