HI Julien, I have replied on the original thread, it provides all suggestions there, now you have started a new thread, arggg, I'm not going to double post as well as it's really not helpful to contribute to a bifurcated thread.
Robert. On 7 February 2018 at 20:56, Julien Valentin <julienvalenti...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > (Sorry to spam ML but I modified a lot my last post trying to be clearer > and i also though a dedicated topic would be better..) > > So to sum up the problem: > BindImageTexture stateattribute is not a textureattribute (_imageunit != > _textureunit) but it sometimes have to bind texture object on a textureunit > in case data of the associated texture has gone dirty > > The current implementation relies on user to setup > BindImageTexture::_targettex as texture attribute of "the same stateset" (and > then relies on this texatt to upload dirtied data if required) > It works well but involves a systematic texture->apply (texobj.bind) overcost > at each use... > > to make BindImageTexture "autonomous", We then need: > - a way to know if texture have to be applied : > - a textureunit on which to applied > > What I've proposed : > - clarify semantic given to textures::_modifiedcount to be the > textureobjectmodifiedcount. So, as texobjs are owned by Texture, i putted > modifiedcount in Texture and removed it from daughter classes. > - in LayeredTextures (cubemap, texture2Darray) i changed modifiedcount to > layermodifiedcount these flags doesn't have the same purpose as the > textureobjectmodifiedcount as it's just a inner mechanism not to upload > unchanged layer image (not related to the textureobject state). > > and Then I added a textureunit prop in BindImageTexture, this tu is used to > applytexattribute(_targettex) if required. > (Note it's user charge to set this prop correctely according other uses of > the _targettex as texattribute in the rest of your scenegraph) > > https://github.com/openscenegraph/OpenSceneGraph/pull/467 > My pr has been rejected: > >> Making _modifiedCount part of the base class is broken because you end up >> having to duplicate the data structure for the array version of texture. >> >> Also I can grasp how 12 changed files could be at all a minimal change set. >> You've merged three set of changes into one commit. >> >> Adding the texture unit as into BindImageTexture just feels like this class >> is getting more a more tightly coupled state that breaks the orthogonal >> design that the OSG and OpenGL try to maintain, the fact you are having to >> do this tight coupling suggests that approach is far from idea and may need >> revising at a fundamental level. >> >> I'm closing this PR as it just contains too many different problems. > > > so i'm now asking community reviews and insights because I can't see myself a > better compromise to finish BindImageTexture. > > Thanks in advance > > Cheers, > Julien > > ------------------ > Read this topic online here: > http://forum.openscenegraph.org/viewtopic.php?p=72947#72947 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
