i made some change to this abstraction in order to compute only the time use
for the gemhead loop and not the time between 2 images.
on my computer, it's about 11ms.
but with the display list optimisation, it fall to 6ms about.
cyrille
Roman Haefeli a écrit :
as always: i forgot the
hello cyrille
thank you for the adjustments. i think i understand the difference
between measuring the gemhead loop and the time between 2 images. but
the other thing with the optimization still remains unclear to me and it
seems, that it doesn't work here. when i stop the first and start the
Roman Haefeli a écrit :
hello cyrille
thank you for the adjustments. i think i understand the difference
between measuring the gemhead loop and the time between 2 images. but
the other thing with the optimization still remains unclear to me and it
seems, that it doesn't work here. when i
hello cyrille
thank you. [any] was what i was looking for. it can store a gem-pointer.
but as you mentioned it doesn't work when delayed.
putting this in the render chain works and gives the expected result:
[t b b a]
| //
[any ]
but this makes pd/gem completely stuck:
[t b b a]
|
Frank Barknecht a écrit :
Hallo,
cyrille henry hat gesagt: // cyrille henry wrote:
don't forget you can optimized your patch with GEMglGenList / GEMglNewList etc
in order to create a display list so that you patch could resume in :
repeat 1000
[
GEMglCallList
I've never hear of this
cyrille henry a écrit :
hello,
anyway, if you wish to draw 1000 primitive,( with a well optimized patch,)
the only thing you need is a good graphic card.
btw.
http://nusmuk.free.fr/fleur/
some of those got more than 200 000 cube, (render at 1 fps for the slower).
patch to make this
hi IOhannes
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 14:46 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Roman Haefeli wrote:
hello cyrille
thank you. [any] was what i was looking for. it can store a gem-pointer.
but as you mentioned it doesn't work when delayed.
putting this in the render chain works and gives
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 17:15 +0100, cyrille henry wrote:
btw.
http://nusmuk.free.fr/fleur/
some of those got more than 200 000 cube, (render at 1 fps for the slower).
hey, soo nice pictures. do you have also a movie of them? wonderfull to
see what is possible with gem.
roman
patch to make
Roman Haefeli a écrit :
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 17:15 +0100, cyrille henry wrote:
btw.
http://nusmuk.free.fr/fleur/
some of those got more than 200 000 cube, (render at 1 fps for the slower).
hey, soo nice pictures. do you have also a movie of them?
no, they did not really move.
thanks
c
On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 05:15:32PM +0100, cyrille henry wrote:
anyway, if you wish to draw 1000 primitive,( with a well optimized patch,)
the only thing you need is a good graphic card.
btw.
http://nusmuk.free.fr/fleur/
some of those got more than 200 000 cube, (render at 1 fps for the
as always: i forgot the attachment
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 23:24 +0100, Roman Haefeli wrote:
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 07:14 -0600, chris clepper wrote:
On 2/28/07, Roman Haefeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i might be wrong but in my eyes it doesn't make sense to
11 matches
Mail list logo
