Primitive level tessellation is probably a good idea for new primitives just getting tessellation routines (for example, when NURBS tessellation gets implemented a broad survey of test cases will be important.)
Also, some of our primitives (I know of at least hyp) won't generate valid results even though they do generate something - it might be interesting to have an option to automatically run the bot_* tools to get all the faces facing in the same direction and flip all the normals to see whether or not changes are produced (i.e. one direction or the other for the normals SHOULD be the same as the bot prior to the bot tool that syncs up the normals being run - if neither is that would indicate a mixed normals problem somewhere) but of course that's more complexity and runtime. Cheers, CY On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 9:13 PM, brlcad <[email protected]> wrote: > > For what it's worth, I've actually seen several primitives fail tessellation > (iirc: tgc, dsp, ars, pipe) over the years so if only for regression > purposes, it's useful to check them. > Cheers! > Sean ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF Dev2Dev email is sponsored by: WikiLeaks The End of the Free Internet http://p.sf.net/sfu/therealnews-com _______________________________________________ BRL-CAD Developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/brlcad-devel
