Re: cost of design decision

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Angus Dorbie (dorbie++at++sgi.com)
Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:33:50 -0800

I'd use traversal masks on the DCS's
so you can either change the mask on the DCS's or change the mask on the
channel to toggle each DCS individually. CULL and DRAW traversal
simultaneously would do it.

If you need more help than this just ask.

Kevin Curry wrote:
>
> Hello Performers:
>
> I am working with the following scenario and I have a question which
> follows:
>
> I'm using pfdNewCircles with 16 triangles (GeoSets) to represent blips
> on a radar. The radar has some range, X, whereby objects that are
> further away than X do not appear on the radar. The GeoSets are
> attached to Geodes, which are attached to DCSes.
>
> Which of the following is more costly to implement when items move out
> of range and should disappear from the radar:
> 1. Draw the pfdNewCircles all the time and just move their DCSs'
> translation matrices to some whacked out location like (-10000,
> -10000, -10000)?
> 2. Draw the pfdNewCircles all the time and make their GeoSets'
> GeoStates transparent?
> 3. Call pfDCS->removeChild and remove the blipDCSes from the radar
> (also a DCS);
>
> Thanks! - Kevin
>
> --
> Kevin M. Curry - http://csgrad.cs.vt.edu/~kcurry
> M.S. Candidate, Computer Science
> Graduate Research Asst. VT-CAVE,
> University Visualization & Animation Group
>
> 

-- 
"Only the mediocre are always at their best." -- Jean Giraudoux


For advanced 3D graphics Performer + OpenGL based examples and tutors:
http://www.dorbie.com/

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Wed Jan 20 1999 - 14:33:55 PST

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