> hi Fabrice. Was checking your idea about storing the geometry and it > looks like its the best. Thats the way big boyz do :) It might seam extra work (it is btw) but once you will be familiar with some routines you're gonna do just fine
> I.m thinking in, as a cube has the same vertices, independent from its > position, and it has only 1 subGeometry, i could store the subGeometry > and add it to the main Cube/mesh (that will hold all the cubes of the > same material). thats where I'am atm, ending a single mesh with loads of definition, yet fulling all subgeometries up to the nose to use every entries. composed from multiple sources meshes. Here a little test of the rewrited merging routine. This shows 1 receiver object, added a second one, added same second one to allow easy assemblage with offsets of positions only (your case) support for multiple materials from two meshes with possibly multiple materials, and different finishes. note here the extrude circle profile has flat shading while the square profile extrude has a smooth surface. This ugly composite is one single mesh composed from a series of meshes from primitives and extrudes having shared and non shared orders. http://www.closier.nl/broomstick/mergetest.html I'm still having few issues on materials, but if my neurones can stand the load of heat, with a bit of luck it should land in svn very soon. > But to achieve this, i have a question: is there a way to move the vertices > instead of looping through all of them and change > their coordinates? I saw your second message, yes basically that would be either another cube or add the vertices with offsets position/rotation. > And is this way better than the one before (adding faces manually) or > maybe the Merger will have even better performance? The MeshHelper addFace is indeed ment to add faces as the names says, tho its ment to be used for small quantities. Not that it would not do the trick, but because it would perform lots of stuff that are not required as you can better fill 3 vectors and push in one time. Therefor MeshHelper has a build function. And of course soon the updated Merge class. Yet that's regarding the geometry as is. If you have loads of cubes, you will have to prepare a series of "master" cubes or offset the uv's of one, during iteration so they get the "right" mapping where a single map could cover more cubes and look unique per cube. If not, your project will become a ram monster as you would end up with a massive amount of bitmapmaterials+maps. Fabrice On May 10, 2011, at 6:06 PM, rjgtav wrote: > hi Fabrice. Was checking your idea about storing the geometry and it > looks like its the best. > I.m thinking in, as a cube has the same vertices, independent from its > position, and it has only 1 subGeometry, i could store the subGeometry > and add it to the main Cube/mesh (that will hold all the cubes of the > same material). But to achieve this, i have a question: is there a way > to move the vertices instead of looping through all of them and change > their coordinates? > And is this way better than the one before (adding faces manually) or > maybe the Merger will have even better performance? > > Thanks, > Rjgtav
