What are the newer haxelib physics engines besides “box2d and nape”?
The haxelib that hasn’t been updated for a long time feels unreliable!
Have you tried reporting, or resolving the issues you’ve discovered?
These open-source community projects are supported by users like you and me, contributing where we can, even if that’s just a useful bug report. And, if you’re able, submit a pull-request with a proposed fix.
echo
A 2D Physics library written in Haxe.
haxelib install echo
Unfortunately, I am unable to resolve it!
I have posted multiple times, but the community seems indifferent, so I decided to switch engines directly
I think a library that has not been maintained for a long time is unreliable!
It seems that everyone is using ‘echo’ because it is new enough
Do you think you don’t need a physics engine?
I saw that there have been many bug fixes merged since the last release of box2d to Haxelib. We’re planning to release a new box2d update to Haxelib with those fixes very soon.
I’d like to set some expectations going forward, though. There are no plans to add new features in the Haxe version of box2d at this time. Our version is ported from the AS3 version, and the AS3 version was ported from the original C++ version. I don’t think that it makes sense to add features that don’t exist upstream, or to make breaking changes. People have expectations of what “box2d” is and how it should work, so we probably should not deviate from that except as necessary to accomodate Haxe syntax differences.
That being said, if the original box2d library in AS3 or C++ has new features that aren’t in the Haxe version yet, we’d be happy to review a pull request with those changes. Similarly, we’re certainly willing to merge in bug fixes, if anyone runs into issues.
1 Like
It appears that a fork of Nape is being maintained by the HaxeFlixel team, as the original author appears to have moved on to other things. The most recent release of the HaxeFlixel nape-haxe4 fork to Haxelib, at the time that I am writing this, was in June 2020.
It is likely that the HaxeFlixel team are not implementing new features in nape either. Similar to box2d, nape should be considered feature complete. The HaxeFlixel team is very talented, and I have no doubt that they will continue to fix bugs as necessary to remain compatible with future updates to Haxe or OpenFL.
We are very pleased to see that you are willing to fix the warnings and errors in ‘box2d’
This is the version of ‘haxelib nap’ that I used last time, which encountered a large number of errors during compilation, resulting in compilation failure
I haven’t encountered any errors with ‘haxelib box2d’ yet, but there are a lot of warnings
I am just providing feedback on the situation I have discovered. Thank you all, thank you to all contributors
We hope to prioritize fixing errors and warnings, and new features can also be added if possible. Thank you
When I was learning ‘box2d’ before, did AI say there were limitations to ‘box2d’?
For example, what cannot be dynamically modified? Is this true?
Is’ AI says nape 'more flexible?
box2d 1.2.4 has been released with the latest bug fixes.
Ahahahaha, this is really good news. Thank you for telling me, thank you to all the contributors, thank you
Would you be willing to share the difference between ‘box2d’ and ‘nape’? Thank you
I don’t typically use physics engines in my projects. There is likely someone else in the community who will be much better to answer this question.
1 Like
May be not directly related, but there are a bunch of game engines in Haxe and some of them use upgraded nape/box2d… can be a source of inspiration how they used, etc
for example upgraded Nape is integrated as plugin into Ceramic: ceramic/plugins/nape at 896bbab565358b873de523336cc388eecec6aba2 · ceramic-engine/ceramic · GitHub