Special:
|
[DAT] (requires LDraw-compatible viewer)
|
Subject:
|
Re: Performance Improvement
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 Apr 2000 16:50:26 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
Rui.Martins@link.#nomorespam#pt
|
Viewed:
|
1865 times
|
| |
|
|
On Fri, 7 Apr 2000, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
> Steve:
> > I think that it's better to keep the 4-4disc and 2-4disc files the way
> > they are. The current configuration is more flexible, requires fewer
> > special-size primitives, and is less likely to be mis-applied. The new
> > proposal would only provide a small benefit to rendering speed.
>
> I can't see how Rui's suggested change gives any problems at
> all and I don't mind a few percent speed increase.
>
> > > > I don't see a problem with doing this for the 4-4disc, but it would be a
> > > > problem for the 2-4disc. The 2-4disc is often used in conjuction with a
> > > > 1-4disc
>
> And?
>
> Does the "diameter line" not cross the radius? If there is a
> significant risk of a misalignment, then we shouldn't do it
> with the 2-4disc.
As I said before, in this case it's more correct to use 3-4disc primitive, to
avoid the T type juntions.
> On the other hand does the current 2-4disc give problems, if
> it is at a surface edge...
Yes, cracks may appear ! Same problem like in a T type junction
But has someone said, nothing like real/concrete testing, so here you have the
4-4disc.dat changed by me, using the exactly same points, (except the center),
including the precision.
0 Disc
3 16 1 0 0 0.92 0.00 0.38 0.70 0.00 0.70
3 16 1 0 0 0.70 0.00 0.70 0.38 0.00 0.92
3 16 1 0 0 0.38 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.00 1.00
3 16 1 0 0 0.00 0.00 1.00 -0.38 0.00 0.92
3 16 1 0 0 -0.38 0.00 0.92 -0.70 0.00 0.70
3 16 1 0 0 -0.70 0.00 0.70 -0.92 0.00 0.38
3 16 1 0 0 -0.92 0.00 0.38 -1.00 0.00 -0.00
3 16 1 0 0 -1.00 0.00 -0.00 -0.92 0.00 -0.38
3 16 1 0 0 -0.92 0.00 -0.38 -0.70 0.00 -0.70
3 16 1 0 0 -0.70 0.00 -0.70 -0.38 0.00 -0.92
3 16 1 0 0 -0.38 0.00 -0.92 0.00 0.00 -1.00
3 16 1 0 0 0.00 0.00 -1.00 0.38 0.00 -0.92
3 16 1 0 0 0.38 0.00 -0.92 0.70 0.00 -0.70
3 16 1 0 0 0.70 0.00 -0.70 0.92 0.00 -0.38
Remember to keep a copy of the official version, to replace after, because you
may not like the speed up! ;)
So try it with a huge *.dat file, and if you have a 3D hardware accelerated
board, you will see some difference, since the bottleneck is your processor.
software renders will benefit, but not as much, since here the bottleneck is the
actual drawing in the screen.
See ya
Rui Martins
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Performance Improvement
|
| Steve: (...) I can't see how Rui's suggested change gives any problems at all and I don't mind a few percent speed increase. (...) And? Does the "diameter line" not cross the radius? If there is a significant risk of a misalignment, then we (...) (24 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
