<p>It does not relate to low level libraries. Yes, usually each frame is drawn separately, nothing can change if i dont change anything. However the draw loop is often handled by somebody else in for example game engines, etc. So in fact processing is often lower level stuff than what many people would do day to day.</p>

<p>Pushing matrix state is pretty common, it exists even in graphics languages from 1970's.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-03-24T00:21:27.467Z
> It does not relate to low level libraries., > So in fact processing is often lower level stuff than what many people would do day to day. --- So does it relate to low-level libraries or not?
Evgenia Karunus
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-03-24T08:50:19.200Z
@lakesare No it does not. Lower, does not mean low. In fact low level graphics libraries are rare, mainly because modern systems really dont want you poking in the fabric of the OS. So even something as fundamental as OpenGL is a high level library youd need to go into something like Vulkan to go low enough to be considered low level. But without this kind if high level abstraction it would be impossible to be compatible across devices.
joojaa
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-03-23T17:47:15.733Z
2018-03-23T18:48:26.047Z
2018-03-23T18:48:26.047Z
joojaa
<p>Here are its docs: <a href="https://processing.org/reference" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://processing.org/reference</a>.
Processing is described as a 'language built with the purpose of teaching non-programmers the fundamentals of computer programming in a visual context'.  </p>

<p>However, <strong>how does this language relate to the real-world computer graphics tools</strong>?  </p>

<p>For example:  </p>

<ul>
<li>Is it similar to some low-level library maybe?   </li>
<li>Is the concept of a repeating <code>draw() { background(255) }</code> (in order to draw each new frame of an animation) used in real-world libraries? </li>
<li>Are the same
methods/concepts used (<code>pushMatrix</code>, <code>popMatrix</code>, <code>rotate</code>,
<code>translate</code>)?</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-26T08:15:39.913Z
The problem here is the definition of "real-world computer graphics tools". As long as there is no more or less exact definition of this term, answers will be heavily biased.
haggi krey
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-05-14T13:31:47.083Z
@haggikrey, ones I can earn money with.
Evgenia Karunus
<processing>
How does Processing language relate to the industry standard?
Evgenia Karunus
# How does Processing language relate to the industry standard?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-03-23)

Here are its docs: <https://processing.org/reference>.
Processing is described as a 'language built with the purpose of teaching non-programmers the fundamentals of computer programming in a visual context'.

However, **how does this language relate to the real-world computer graphics tools**?

For example:

* Is it similar to some low-level library maybe?
* Is the concept of a repeating `draw() { background(255) }` (in order to draw each new frame of an animation) used in real-world libraries?
* Are the same
  methods/concepts used (`pushMatrix`, `popMatrix`, `rotate`,
  `translate`)?

**Tags:** processing

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: The problem here is the definition of "real-world computer graphics tools". As long as there is no more or less exact definition of this term, answers will be heavily biased.  
> **username_0**: @username_1, ones I can earn money with.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2018-03-23. Score: 1

It does not relate to low level libraries. Yes, usually each frame is drawn separately, nothing can change if i dont change anything. However the draw loop is often handled by somebody else in for example game engines, etc. So in fact processing is often lower level stuff than what many people would do day to day.

Pushing matrix state is pretty common, it exists even in graphics languages from 1970's.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: > It does not relate to low level libraries., > So in fact processing is often lower level stuff than what many people would do day to day. --- So does it relate to low-level libraries or not?  
> **username_2**: @lakesare No it does not. Lower, does not mean low. In fact low level graphics libraries are rare, mainly because modern systems really dont want you poking in the fabric of the OS. So even something as fundamental as OpenGL is a high level library youd need to go into something like Vulkan to go low enough to be considered low level. But without this kind if high level abstraction it would be impossible to be compatible across devices.  

---

