Hi, On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 11:15 +0200, Marcus Lindblom wrote: > Dirk Reiners wrote: > > Hi Marcus, > > > > Marcus Lindblom wrote: > > > >> > > I also tried doing it myself, using an MFTextureChunk field as > attachment, but I couldn't get the attachment to work as I wanted. I > failed to retrieve the attachment, even though I basically copied the > SimpleNameAttachment line for line. > > I could try to use the Parents field instead. That'd definitely be easier.
kind of, if you can take the 2.x image and texobjchunk as a reference you will note that the changed interface was modified in order to choose the right update method for the texture. In 1.x you most likely have to force a reload the whole texture. I guess this was the main reason not to automatically invalidate the texture as the image was changed. Ideally this change should go back into 1.x. Otherwise people who rely on the image not forcing a reload of the texture chunk will experience a performance drop. Especially if the work with TextureChunk::imageContentChanged. kind regards, gerrit ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Opensg-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users
