Isometric shadows

[jbovenschen]

It will be nice to have shadows like on the image below

[jdan]

Oh wow I love it, great idea. We would need to keep track (and order) all of the shapes, so I guess this depends heavily on #9.

[derhuerst]

+1

[ooflorent]

[jpsullivan]

[NetOpWibby]

Haha, sweet gifs guys!

[jdan]

Sneak peek!

[NetOpWibby]

Nice

[FranDias]

[jpsullivan]

Looks incredible dude. Seriously can't wait to mess with this.

[jbovenschen]

What is the progress on this issue so far?

[rubytastic]

+1

[jdan]

Hi @jbovenschen, I've rewritten isomer to use Three.js (see the threejs branch), and I'm still in the process of making the API backwards compatible and adding a few more features.

Things like shadows and animation will come easy with Three.js, but unfortunately the library becomes very large (when bundled with it, of course).

But anyway, it's coming soon.

[jbovenschen]

Great! I've seen it some months ago. I can help if you like?

Maybe it is better to not bundle it with three.js? And just say three.js is a requirement?

[jjshammas]

Any progress on this? Hope it's still coming. Would be happy to contrib if I can.

[jdan]

@jbovenschen @jjshammas I think the next actionable is for me to open a new issue with a "1.0" release checklist. Then I'll probably direct folks to the 1.0-release branch (doesn't exist yet) for contributions :) Promise I will do that soon! Watch the repo so you get notified about it.

[whoeverest]

What's the plan regarding Three.js integration? Will bundling it be an option, or will it be integrated by default?

I really like how minimal your library is and I plan to use it for a game where resources limited (OLPC learning game, basically) so I wonder what's the direction this project is heading.

Thanks!

[jdan]

Hey @whoeverest,

Thanks for explicitly calling this out. My plan (which I'll be making a more formal announcement about) is to allow users to pass in a Three.js instance, which would then give them access to more features. For use-cases such as yours (or anyone who doesn't want to include such a big library), they'll still have access to the Isomer API as-is.

Any thoughts on that?

[NetOpWibby]

That sounds good to me @whoeverest @jdan.

[whoeverest]

Yep, awesome. :-) @NetOperatorWibby @jdan

[cryptoquick]

I'm looking forward to this! Super exciting idea, @jdan . I've had some involvement in the voxel.js project, and they're moving towards stackgl. Since there's so much community momentum behind stackgl, perhaps that'd be a better engine to target. They have the backing of Mikola Lysenko, which is a huge graphics heavy-hitter, and they're tightly integrated with browserify. Because it's more modular and they place a greater emphasis on writing from the bottom-up, it should be lighter in weight, too.

[jdan]

@cryptoquick ah! I would totally be up for including a library if it were small and quick

[glrodasz]

There is any updates on this?

[jdan]

@Garethderioth Sadly, no. I have not been working on isomer for quite some time. There is a threejs branch that contains the updated library to do this, but I never got close to shipping anything.