From: H. H. <hen...@gm...> - 2008-08-27 15:14:14
|
Yes. I think this is a good point. We do an assert check in debug version, but otherwise continue. I vote for this. On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:36 PM, Orhun Birsoy <orh...@gm...>wrote: > I'll ask a question from a completely different view. Note that I am not > excatly proposing this, I am just mentioning it so that we can discuss... > > Do we need to check for a tolerance? In debug, we can do whatever we want > (i.e. assert etc) but for release I don't believe we have to check anything. > Just continue the calculations as if nothing happened. > > What happens when you load a singular matrix to OpenGL with glLoadMatrix(or > glMultMatrix)? Spec mentions singular matrices several times and it > basically says the results are undefined. > > From OpenGL Spec 3.0 page 58 > If the GL implementation determines that the modelview > matrix is uninvertible, then the entries in the inverted matrix are > arbitrary. In > any case, neither normal transformation nor use of the transformed normal > may > lead to GL interruption or termination. > > Why should glmMatInverse be any different? Such low level functions should > not have such checks (or such behaviours defined). Higher level code should > check whether the matrices they generate are well conditioned. > > <semiserious> > We can always provide "safe" versions, which will have more defined > behaviours. glmMatInverse4f_s anyone? > </semiserious> > > -- > Orhun Birsoy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's > challenge > Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great > prizes > Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world > http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ > _______________________________________________ > Glsdk-devel mailing list > Gls...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/glsdk-devel > > -- Henri 'henux' Häkkinen |