Open diarmidmackenzie opened 1 year ago
Wow thanks for this writeup and sharing this repo! https://github.com/fabmax/physx-js-webidl
at eval (physx-js-webidl.js:969:22)
I notice that js file is minimized, is it possible to see the context of the error in a non-minified version?Sorry to write on this thread 1 year after last communications, but it would be nice to have Physx migrated to physx-js-webidl because it have support for vehicles and this is a big point, useful for a-frame + physx. So, just a manifestation of interest!
I've been looking at extending the available PhysX API bindings.
My immediate goal was to experiment with Projection on Fixed Joints to solve a problem where walls of bricks joined together with fixed joints become wobbly above a certain size.
For future reference, this issue documents my progress on a couple of fronts.
This is the "obvious" approach, and should have been straightforward.
I made some minor updates to enable a couple of new API calls here
Rebuilding should be pretty straightforward, but I had a few issues
This is used by PHY, a Physics library for Three.js that I've been looking at.
Benefits of using this WASM build include:
I've been making some changes on this branch to try to get this working. Unfortunately it's not staightforward.
The way the PhysX CPP API gets translated into a JS API is quite different for this alternative build.
Working through the differences has basically been a matter of:
If made a bunch of fixes & hit a number of errors, but still hitting problems inside the physics simulation:
Presumably something has been initialized incorrectly due to the change in API, but it's not straightforward to find out what.
I'm wrapping up this investigation for now. While I had wanted to experiment with projection of Fixed Joints, I only thought there was a small chance of it solving my problems, and think a better solution is likely to be by following the advice in the API docs and use a single actor with multiple shapes...
Nevertheless, it's likely that we'll want to extend the exposed parts of the PhysX API and/or move to 5.1+ at some point, so with that in mind, I've documented my investigations so far here.