RE: pre-cull return value question

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Dorosky, Christopher G (christopher.g.dorosky++at++lmco.com)
Date: 06/27/2001 15:20:02


Sebastian,

I believe that if you return PFTRAV_PRUNE, that the post_cull is called,
whereas if you return PFTRAV_TERM, it is not.

If you set the cull result, the post_cull will be called, assuming a
pre_cull return of PFTRAV_CONT.

There can be times when you want to get into the post_cull with a culled
object, and times when you absolutely want to prevent that.

Christopher Dorosky
Lead Electronic Systems Engineer - Real Time Simulation
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control - Dallas
christopher.g.dorosky++at++lmco.com
972-603-2349

-----Original Message-----
From: Sebastian Capella [mailto:scapella++at++gstone.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 1:25 PM
To: Performer List Mailing
Subject: pre-cull return value question

Hi,

I would like some verification on this:

I am looking at the precull return value.

It appears that returning any value != PFTRAV_CONT results in termination of
the cull without further testing or postcull callback triggering.

I am just curious as to what the intent is here.. is it to make the cull
determination entirely within the precull callback?

I am trying to weigh this approach in comparison to using pfCullResult().

I guess what I would like to understand is the varying philosopies of each
approach.

So any help you could provide would be very.. helpful.

Thanks

Sebastian

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/software/performer/
Open Development Project: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/performer/
             Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com
         Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com


New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 27 2001 - 15:19:32 PDT

This message has been cleansed for anti-spam protection. Replace '++at++' in any mail addresses with the '@' symbol.