Collaborating the development of a Three.js extension #2357
Replies: 16 comments 36 replies
-
|
i personally don't care much about this (CST 3D development is basically dead), but do feel free to use ideas/code from CST 3D if you need to |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I would love to participate in this! I think that my implementation is the one that covers more content, having Physics, GLB importing, text geometry... check here (It is easy to break, get errors... But I do not have that much of experience with JavaScript coding, this was my first project! Happy to learn 🧠 Check a small demo here |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Experience in JS will be very helpful I'm busy at the moment but I'd love to take a more in-depth look at what you've written and see what we can do with it. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hay! I'd love to work with you on this and have major plans in mind. If willing, please talk with me on discord. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
To be honest, everyone is going to want their version to be the one that stays so the critical part is deciding what stays and what goes. Also, we could just write from scratch (no pun intended). |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hello! I just want to interject because I think this is a cool idea, but I also have a side quest like proposition for you guys As everyone here knows, I own a TurboWarp mod called NitroBolt, and we have a native 3D extension planned. What I propose is that you can also join us to work on it eventually! We already have one person on board, but the more the merrier! NitroBolt's implementation would definitely surpass anything you can do with an extension only. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Yeahhh nitrobolt! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'd only agree to NitroBolt if it would be the same extension developed for Turbowarp and if Turbowarp had the same 3D extension as NitroBolt; only not natively included in the pallets. I wouldn't want to make two different extensions. What you're describing sounds like something integrated into the VM and GUI? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I think the major differences would be that NB's would be within NB like the pen extension is, and we'll be using special made apis, hooks, features, etc. Trying to make it fully fleshed out. It wouldn't hurt to try something beyond and more capable l |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Of course, I was only supposing that instead of writing something new we could build off of an already existing Three.js extension |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Here are the links to some of the code: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I think we should get started on this |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'm testing your extension with mine, how should the step simulation blocks be used? If I just add one inside the loop it runs a million times and the cube just disappears. My browser crashed multiple times... (Out of memory) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Good question, it looks fine for now. Why are you multiplying delta time by ten? For most cases, simply using the plain "step simulation" block works fine as that implies delta time from Turbowarp's framerate. That could be the cause of the problem. Also, check the developer inspector to check for logs and warnings, my extension will try to give warnings when the user attempts to do things improperly (e.g., with the wrong vertex list or object name) but Ammo.js handles the backend. Also, if you could please give me an SB3 file so I could try it myself? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
You can do it, I don't have as much experience. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Um, github doesn't let me place sb3 here. Does this discord link work without account? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
rename it to a zip, no the link does not work for me |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@Civ3ro I haven't tested your extension in full but could you give a link to the src so I can check it out? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Still, I wanna participate and show what I've been doing too, but I don't
want it public yet.
…On Tue, Dec 23, 2025, 1:49 PM Brackets-Coder ***@***.***> wrote:
Before we go crazy, though, please give me some time today to check out
your extension and see if we can't work with it before we try making
something new
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2357 (reply in thread)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANYWUKJVZ6BNBQI3EGGIBHT4DGMFPAVCNFSM6AAAAACOTVLPT6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43URDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHMYTKMZSHE3DGNA>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
That's fine. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@Civ3ro running "get Scene [objects]" on a fresh startup empty project returns "TypeError: undefined is not an object (evaluating 'scene.traverse')" every tick |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
yeah, I haven't made the extension error proof. You need to create a new scene first. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@Civ3ro I'm creating a private repository to host all of our separate Three.js extensions until we can decide on a better course of action. I've invited you to collaborate and will eventually move this discussion to that repository @Drago-Cuven please let me know if you would like an invite as well. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Yes plz |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
noted, sending you one now |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Just confirming that https://scratch.mit.edu/users/DragoCuven/ is still you? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
This discussion is moved to the private repo |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
yes
…On Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 7:30 PM Brackets-Coder ***@***.***> wrote:
Just confirming that https://scratch.mit.edu/users/DragoCuven/ is still
you?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2357 (reply in thread)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANYWUKOWJ5RAY7YUUZGNVJD4DHUCPAVCNFSM6AAAAACOTVLPT6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43URDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHMYTKMZTGEYTEMQ>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@Brackets-Coder Talking in discord I met with @astruegenius he's also interested and would like to participate! You can add him to the repo. He has made 4 three extensions, I haven't tested them tho |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Okay, I'll invite but note that it's looking like we're writing one from scratch. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Can you explain? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Yes, there's a discussion on the repo explaining our reasoning. just give me a sec to invite and then you'll see it there |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I've invited you Summary of reasons for starting from scratch: Many people have already written their own extension, all of us want a three.js extension on the gallery. Starting from scratch gives us a fresh perspective on the functionality and enables all of us to be familiar with the codebase from day one, instead of each person having to learn how each other person's extension works (much more time effective). If we're not starting from scratch, we're using the implementations in each authors' individual extensions which we vote is the best (e.g., a renderer in one extension is faster or uses less memory than another) Basically, the idea is we all find the best way to get the best three.js extension on the gallery, even if it means making one from scratch. I'm just hoping this won't cause any conflicts with preferring some ideas over another (after all, we're all on the same page and we all want the same result: an awesome three.js extension on the gallery). |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanks, I've accepted the invite. Alright. I suppose that we can move to the private repo. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
This is fire 🔥 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Would you like to join? Not much done yet. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
nah, i am just interested on the development |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
See #2356.
This is the discussion for the collaborative development of a Three.js extension. It includes myself, @Brackets-Coder, @Civ3ro, and potentially @Drago-Cuven if he agrees as well. I think I heard @CST1229 was also making a similar extension.
Let's face it. All the developers want to make a Three.js extension; many of them have already started. The goal is to determine whether one is actually necessary and how to make the best extension possible.
I have concerns for the fact that a 3D rendering extension already exists on the gallery and the publication of a Three.js extension might potentially make Simple3D obsolete, though things like it's manual control over transformations and smaller block pallet than a three.js extension might be appealing to some users.
I also have concerns for the ease of development when collaboration comes into play—things can quickly get chaotic.
Here's my idea:
All participants, including myself, discuss a course of action for the merging of each participant's extension into one cohesive project. This may include the discarding of code or ideas upon which we agree are not optimal, most beneficial, up to date, etc. (don't get your feelings hurt, we all have the same goal).
When we've decided the best possible merging of the extension, one participant is nominated as the "project leader" and will host a parent repository for the development of said extension, and each participant will fork the parent repo. Development will occur on a separate branch of the repository rather than the master branch.
One of the first steps of the collaboration will be the familiarization with each other's workflows and codebases; after all, I don't understand what you wrote and you don't understand what I wrote. When this is complete we can decide how to best merge the various versions of the extensions—or, if no merging seems suitable due, we can just re-write the extension from Scratch (it might even be less work than getting two codebases to work together, and that way we'll all be on the same page). Throughout the collaborative process, each participant agrees to provide constructive criticism and valuable feedback peaceably to ensure the highest code quality and consistency between the varying code of the different participants.
I generally prefer working alone because it's easier to keep my thoughts centralized, but I think this will be a great learning experience for everyone. Good luck!
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions