Thanks for comments, Peter. By "easier to pick", I didn't mean relative to other lines in the scene, but that I wouldn't have to be as close to the actual line geometry. It is a question of whether the line will be in the list of intersections, rather than which intersection I choose.
I suspect the same thing about whether it is worth the effort. > As for your "other kinds of thinks" in the scene you should be aware that the > performance of PolytopeIntersector for 2d-geometries is rather bad. It is > much faster to use LineSegementIntersector for those and combine the results > afterwards. By 2d-geometries, do you mean triangles and quads (and not 2D scenes)? And that it would be better to run the polytope intersector for points and lines, and a separate line intersector for triangles and quads, and combine intersections? I know all of that is pretty much what you said, but I wanted to be sure. That's using two intersection traversals. Sounds interesting if it is really faster. thanks, andy _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
