>> non-high-end systems (mine, too). >> > I'm getting slightly frustrated here. I've spent months to improve > performance, and I feel by now that I at least deserve a fair judgement > for my effords, i.e. an apples-to-apples comparison rather than a highly > skewed comparison. > Sorry if my statement was offensive - this was not my intention. Yes, I know your system does much more than the current implementation. And to make it clear: I love it! But any cloud intensive local-weather brings my system from 30fps down to 5fps. This is on all my average low-end dual core, nvidia 9xxx based systems. I don't complain, because I know about the complexity of your model. > I beg to disagree here. The terrain presampler is a highly specialized > tool, which is best for what it is supposed to do. A fast vector-method to > retrieve terrain elevations is a good multi-purpose tool quite independent > of terrain presampling. > And here my frustration starts. All the recent recoding work was done to better support your local-weather, allow faster processing and easier configuration. I tried to do it the FlightGear-way: implement algorithms and computing intensive parts as subsystems and expose configurable parts to the property tree; use Nasal as a supporing tool, not a core element; reuse existing code (One more clarification: I love Nasal, too!). Most of the weather-interpolation code was removed, because we have a good choice of existing and well tested filters in the autopilot code doing that job perfectly well without a single line of code, neither C++ nor Nasal.
Torsten ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances and start using them to simplify application deployment and accelerate your shift to cloud computing http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
