Talk:Stella (software)

This article was nominated for deletion on 16 May 2015. The result of the discussion was keep.

Wiki-images from Great Stella

See: Template:Great_Stella (Go to template page and click on What links here to see list of images)

Tom Ruen 18:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources?

I'm not sure what sources are needed for software. There's a website. I didn't make the article, but I did upload images which use this software, linked under Template:Great_Stella , images uploaded listed under Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Great_Stella. Tom Ruen 03:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Press coverage is usually a good external source for software. I see you've added some external references. I'm popping offline for a moment but I'll check them out for you later. -- Longhair\^talk 05:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this issue is closed now that references to the TV appearance and PC Plus magazine review have been added RobertCWebb (talk) 03:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Details about this software, given its uniqueness

The kinds of topics that I think would make useful additions to this page, given the unique nature of the software itself, include: Dicussion of the software itself: what language is it written in? What went into the process of writing it? Discussion of the possible controversy over the closed nature of the sofware, including perhaps reference to the debate over patenting algorithms and mathematical theorems themselves: Was the library of polytopes taken from other sources of such data? Or was it generated mathematically "from scratch" as it were? It's hard to find information about this that isn't promotional in some sense... — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatthewCushman (talk • contribs) 01:50, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am in contact with the author, and will invite him to comment. —Tamfang (talk) 01:16, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it's taken me a while to reply. To answer some questions: Stella is written in C/C++ with OpenGL for graphics. You'd need to be more specific when asking about what went into the process of writing it. Me spending too many hours in a room by myself I suppose! I'm not aware of any controversy regarding Stella. Is there controversy now over software not being "open", by which I presume you mean open source? I hold no patents, so I'm not sure what you mean about patents. I'm not claiming to patent anything mathematical. The uniform polyhedra in Stella are generated in the program from nothing more than the vertex description using my own algorithm. The 4D uniform polytopes and scaliforms are also generated in Stella from their 3D vertex figures using my own algorithm. I made a lot of these 3D vertex figures myself, and various people helped to create the rest. Knowing what vertex figures were required came from various internet resources, mostly Jonathan Bowers's excellent site on uniform polychora http://www.polytope.net/hedrondude/polychora.htm. As far as I know, Stella4D is still the only place where all 1849 uniform polychora can be seen. The other types of polytopes are generally all created in Stella in other ways. (RobertCWebb (talk) 12:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Just come across this. Yes, it would be nice to know more, but this is Wikipedia and we put verifiability above truth. Information must be traceable to references published by an independent and reliable source, but personal comments by the author are not generally regarded as such. I have one reference that I can check out, but please don't expect too much.

As to the Open Source bit, it's enough to state that Stella is proprietary and leave it at that. This is not the place for the wider argument. Nor is the bit about maths relevant - it is the expression in code that is copyright, not the logic in itself. Nothing to see here, please move on.

— Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]