From: Christopher Phillips (shrydar_at_jaruth.com)
Date: 2004-11-04 05:12:35
On 4 Nov 2004, at 01:23, Steve Judd wrote: > Hola CJ, > >> Do you still do fullscreen clears rather than writing to the screen >> with an eor-plotter? >> Or are you referring to the cost of clearing the eorbuffer? > > Actually, I have a very low opinion of eor-plotters (solid polygons). solid? Pattern fills like the ones your lib supports are pretty easy to add to an eor-plotter. Texture mapping or gouraud shading's another issue altogether of course. > They are slow and obnoxious, with special cases and such to handle, and > there are much better -- faster, cleaner, more flexible -- ways to do > it. They are hard to get working, and at the moment you have much better performance than me on simple convex objects, but I suspect with a bit more optimisation a good eor-plotter will win if there's much overdraw. I only just got the routines in Effluvium debugged/working in time to release it - there's quite a bit of scope for improving the code. Congrats on the speed of lib3d btw - I still haven't gotten around to playing with it, but your quoted 8-10 fps on the Elite craft is v. impresssive. > > Yes, I do fullscreen, or at least full-the-area-containing-data clears. > Or did, I guess, since this was all years ago. You really have to, if > you're drawing more than one object. For a single object, my > recollection > is that once you factor in overhead it's always faster, unless you're > drawing just one or two polygons, and only maybe then. hmm - I overwrite the entire screen every refresh, but each byte is only touched once regardless of the number of polygons. > >>> As to organization, vertical organization is preferred for any >>> plotting.True for BOBs etc, but I would have thought less applicable >>> to 3d? > > Any routine involving an x,y coordinate benefits, especially line and > polygon routines. I use a pair of charmaps myself (32*16), but that's mostly to save me having one eor-fill routine per character row - it's a memory saving rather than a speed thing, and one that would not be required with a hardware eor-buffer such as the one I proposed in an earlier mail in this thread. later, Christopher. Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Archive generated by hypermail pre-2.1.8.