Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Box2D 2.4.0 #114

Open
LeXXik opened this issue Oct 3, 2020 · 8 comments
Open

Box2D 2.4.0 #114

LeXXik opened this issue Oct 3, 2020 · 8 comments

Comments

@LeXXik
Copy link

LeXXik commented Oct 3, 2020

Hi, all! Thank you for the effort!
Are there any plans on adding support to the new Box2D version 2.4.0?

@Birch-san
Copy link

Birch-san commented Oct 30, 2020

I've forked box2d.js and added support for Box2D v2.4.0:
https://github.com/Birch-san/box2d-wasm

@kripken
Copy link
Owner

kripken commented Oct 30, 2020

I don't have time to maintain this project myself, but I'd be happy to merge pull requests like that, @Birch-san

@Birch-san
Copy link

thanks! :) I'm not sure what that pull request would look like — box2d-wasm isn't a fork in the strictest sense — it's a "start again" but with copying + modifying of a few files (the .idl bindings, glue stub, helpers), and with an entirely different approach to build and source control.

I think it'd be relatively easy to contribute TypeScript typings to box2d.js (i.e. by running https://github.com/Birch-san/box2d-wasm/tree/master/webidl-to-ts on each .idl file you have), or to contribute a .wasm and .idl of the Box2D v2.4.0+@f0f9d50 commit that I'm on, but anything beyond that would be substantially harder (e.g. due to the cmake-based build system being very different to the Makefile-based build system).

@joex92
Copy link

joex92 commented Nov 3, 2020

THanks @Birch-san, What about Box2D 2.4.1? Does 2.4.0 fixes issue #90 ?

@Birch-san
Copy link

@JxM-92 I don't know whether the small block allocator has been made any less leaky in newer versions, but the repro looks simple so should be easy to check.

I did actually try upgrading to Box2D v2.4.1, but it instantly encounters assertion failures at runtime (fails to assert that inertia must be positive). this is something that needs reporting as an issue. I briefly looked at the commits that had happened in the intervening time, and wonder whether it's related to reverting back to an older interpolation algorithm.

@kripken
Copy link
Owner

kripken commented Nov 4, 2020

@Birch-san In that case, maybe a link in this repo could go to yours?

@Birch-san
Copy link

@kripken that sounds good, if you'd be okay with that?

@kripken
Copy link
Owner

kripken commented Nov 9, 2020

@Birch-san Yeah, it sounds like a good idea to link to it from the readme, could help people find it.

If people find it useful maybe we can merge the repos, that's another option. But for now a link is a good simple step.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants