Eric Hirschorn (eric++at++paradigmsim.com)
Wed, 11 Feb 1998 16:37:54 -0600
In a previous life I've had to write my own "pfStepper" nodes,
built on pfSwitch's, to get around the timimg problems you
describe for pfSequence (e.g. to make sure lightning bolts turn
on and off repeatedly for constant integer numbers of frames each).
I don't think there is any way to guarantee that the individual
pfSwitch's of a pfSequence will be drawn on predictable numbers
of frame intervals.
For pfSequence timing, I imagine the Performer code sets up
timer callback functions triggered by the real time clock.
The overhead of doing this in APP is probably pretty small,
compared to the overhead that the pfStepper adds to the pfSwitch
-- but I've never done any tests to prove this assertion besides
using pfStats for overall timing.
Eric
--
Eric S. Hirschorn Paradigm Simulation, Inc.
972-960-2301 x264 (VMail) http://www.paradigmsim.com
972-960-9049 (FAX) 14900 Landmark Blvd., Suite 400
eric++at++paradigmsim.com Dallas, Texas 75240 USA
=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/Technology/Performer/
Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com
Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:56:46 PDT