Search Amazon.com:
Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
  • Post
  • Reply
Fib
Mar 3, 2005

~ Goodbye, real world ~





Nuke Mexico posted:

One of the few reasonable STL re-implementations was done for the pupose of exposing more memory-management options, i.e. using a pool- or cached allocator of some point, so I might be able to buy that. There's almost never any excuse for re-implementing your own vector or linked list or hash table yourself "because it is faster" because it almost certainly never is.

Link to dis:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/w...2007/n2271.html

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Fib
Mar 3, 2005

~ Goodbye, real world ~





Zakalwe posted:

Ray tracing/casting is computationally expensive. With M rays and N triangles, you get M*N intersection tests. Let's say you're rendering a 1024x1024 image with 1 ray cast per pixel and 6 million triangles. That's 1,048,576,000,000 intersection tests per frame.

...

My advice? Stick with the rasterisation for this application at least.

Wasn't the idea of the raycasting suggestion to skip the triangles altogether though, and just march through the volume data?

Fib
Mar 3, 2005

~ Goodbye, real world ~





Adhemar posted:

Better to leave the image in the centre and move the inputs to the left to line up with it. Please.

And right-align the text labels!

Edit:

This is going to be the best in-house configuration tool ever!

Fib fucked around with this message at Jul 8, 2008 around 19:30

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply