| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Jeremy H. Sproat writes:
> I've tried the LEdit mode, and gave up in frustration due to the slow redraw
> (particularly with the text). I haven't formalized my list of (complaints?
> bugs? dunno) concerning LDGLite, but I can if you want.
Sure, go ahead and elaborate. I can't fix it if I don't know about it.
I did actually try to fix the text update speed at one point. That's
a well known problem with the glut library I use. I can't remember why
I stopped working on a fix for that. Probably got distracted by
something more interesting at the time...
> But there's one thing I've noticed that's in common with all LDraw tools
> based on OpenGL, and that's that they're much slower than the original
> LDraw.exe. Like by an order of magnitude. Please note that I am running
> Windows 2000 on a non-3d-accelerated laptop, a notoriously slow combination
> for OpenGL apps.
Do you have any numbers to back that up? All my tests on my crummy
old PCs (with software only opengl) show LDRAW.EXE to be much slower,
except perhaps on an 8 bit display, where opengl is forced dither
the rgb values.
Now LEDIT.EXE on the other hand seems a touch faster than ldglite's
ledit mode on my un-accelerated opengl tests. Mostly due to the
lousy text rendering speed of ldglite.
What speed is your laptop? My fastest piece of junk is a PII 266MHz,
but I don't bog it down with Windows 2000. It's still running
Win95 when it's not running linux.
Don
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
63 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
