Subject:
|
Re: Matrix mirroring question
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 29 Jan 2004 01:09:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1964 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Lars C. Hassing wrote:
> Since det(AB)=det(A)det(B) I don't think it matters whether you check the determinant
> (mirroring) at each level or the final level.
Thanks. I implemented it that way, and it seems to be working so far, so I
believe that everything is fine.
> Too bad you didn't add a comment in your old code :-)
> I often beat myself for not adding more elaborate comments.
> While things may seem obvious while you're working on them,
> you have forgotten all the good arguments when you get back a year later...
You're too right. Unfortunately, I can go for a while and do a really good job
of commenting, and then I'll slack off for one reason or another (usually as a
result of not coding for a few weeks), and then write huge quantities of code
with no comments at all.
Right not I think I'm doing OK on comments in my new code. And since I started
working on it again a few weeks ago after many months of no work, I'm trying to
add comments to the sections of the existing "new" code that confused me.
I think I have correctly functioning BFC working at this point (I'll be more
confident after I've played with more models). Mind you, it slows down
rendering on my current video card, but it does seem to at least work.
--Travis
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Matrix mirroring question
|
| (...) Since det(AB)=det(A)det(B) I don't think it matters whether you check the determinant (mirroring) at each level or the final level. Too bad you didn't add a comment in your old code :-) I often beat myself for not adding more elaborate (...) (21 years ago, 27-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
