Re: pfLOD / Intersection Traversal Anomaly

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Angus Dorbie (dorbie++at++sgi.com)
Wed, 03 Nov 1999 17:31:16 -0800


Larry Lachman wrote:
>
> Angus Dorbie wrote:
>
> > Larry Lachman wrote:
> > >
> > > Attention: Performer Team
> > >
> > > I am using Performer 2.2.5, and want to report an anomaly with
> > pfLOD
> > > nodes and the intersection traversal. I discovered that if range
> > 0 of
> > > a pfLOD is set to anything greater than 0.0f, then the
> > intersection
> > > traversal stops at the pfLOD and does not visit any of the pfLOD's
> >
> > > children. According to the man page for pfNodeIsectSegs:
> > >
> > > "For pfLODs, the default is to traverse only the child that
> > would
> > > be active at range 0."
> >
> > Doesn't this mean that nothing is active at range zero, so the
> > manual
> > and behaviour is currently correct?
>
> No, it does NOT mean that. The behavior may be correct, but the
> manual does not document the different traversal behaviors on a pfLOD.
>

In my opinion the manual appears to document the correct behaviour.

Your closest LOD is non zero so the zero range LOD point has no data and
therefore nothing to intersect.

By 'nothing active' I simply meant you have no data assigned to the zero
range. Nothing to do with which LOD is actually selected during cull.

Cheers,Angus.

-- 
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with
 no loss of enthusiasm."    -    Winston Churchill.

Performer + OpenGL 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 Nov 03 1999 - 17:31:27 PST

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