<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 4/18/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Marc Cotran</b> <<a href="mailto:marc@cotran.ca">marc@cotran.ca</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">
I'm still not sure exactly what you are trying to do by subclassing<br>vtkActor, but have you considered making a wrapper class instead? I mean<br>something like:<br><br>class Pigment<br>{<br>public:<br> Pigment();<br>
<br>private:<br> vtkActor *internalActor;<br>}<br><br>In most cases this type of class should be fine, but if not, please let<br>me know why you absolutely need to derive from vtkActor, and then we can<br>tackle the invisibility issue.
<br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all">hi,<br>
<br>
well I'd really like some polymorphic action here.. if I was able to have a Pigment that is a vtkActor<br>
I'd be able to use a picker to click around my objects in an elegant way.<br>
<br>
ie. a picker returns an Actor, i check if it's a Pigment and then just do a p->mixThisPigment(result);<br>
<br>
(this is just one example.. there are many other things i'd like my pigments to do)<br>
<br>
As it is I have to push all of my actors through an if-then-else-if oredeal that I don't really like.<br>
I don't think I can evade that by wrapping Actors in a class.<br>
<br>
suggestions are always welcome!! thanks again :-)<br><br>
-- <br><a href="mailto:stoptv@gmail.com">stoptv@gmail.com</a><br>
<br>