What name should PGMM have?

  • DynamicTerrain
  • GeoTerrain
  • TerraScape
  • TerrainNodePath
  • GeoMipMapper
  • TerraMap
  • TerrainMipmapper
  • PandaScape
  • leave it PGMM.
  • Got Something Better!

0 voters

Hi fellow panda users,

Me (and several others) are convinced that PGMM needs a bit better name before it gets integrated. At the IRC we’ve brainstormed a bit and we’ve come up with a little list of possibilities. Please cast your vote (and if you have a better name, give it!)


PS. I also do NOT want to ‘oppress’ the current HeightfieldTesselator which is here, since this one also does a fair job generating terrain of smaller scales. If I’d name this “Terrain” or so that would suggest that the tesselator is no terrain. PGMM is more for larger scales terrain.


Sounds good, but it’s already in use :slight_smile:

I voted for “GeoMipMapper” on the assumption that it actually is using a geomipmapping algorithm. It is, right?

I strongly prefer self-explanatory names to stylish names. Stylish might seem cool now, but when you’re trying to find something in a giant software library consisting of hundreds of modules, you want the module names to be as self-explanatory as possible.

On the other hand, I suppose some people might not know that GeoMipMapping is one of the two major heightfield algorithms these days. So maybe something like “GeoMipHeightfield” would incorporate that piece of information too.

I voted for TerraScape.

To me that one sounds cool. Also, in my opinion, to be as self-explanatory as possible either Terrain or Terra or something like that should be in the name.

I think DynamicTerrain is a bit too generic… it doesn’t say anything about the algorithm itself, plus, it kind of suggests that the HeightfieldTesselator is not dynamic terrain.

JoshYelon has a good point - I like something like GeoMipTerrain or so. It shows kind of both aspects – it’s a terrain generator, and it uses the geomipmapping algorithm.

I think I’m going for GeoMipTerrain.