Re: [openvrml-develop] Re: Problem rendering from one browser into multiple/changing openvrml::gl::viewers

[Braden M. <br...@en...>]

Michael S=F6gtrop wrote:
> Hi Braden,
>=20
> I think the views are not that much of a problem. In case you want to
> have multiple views, you do that for a reason and in this case you
> probably completely ignore the VRML view stuff (like I do). I think a
> view is either coupled to the VRML view concept or free.

Hm... I'm not entirely sold on that; but perhaps you're right.

Part of the problem in assessing this is that having the navigation=20
stuff so tightly embedded with the viewer simply isn't appropriate,=20
regardless of all this. It's one of the things that I've been planning=20
to address after 0.16.

> Regarding the storing of view dependent data in the nodes:
>=20
> I think it might be best to have an 'information item index' in the
> nodes and each view has a self-growing array of information items.

Hm... This might be the right approach. Though I don't think we need the=20
  "information item index" in the node; couldn't we just index on a=20
pointer to the node?

This does require a substantial rethinking of the interaction between=20
the node implementation and the viewer. Instead of the node knowing if=20
it's been rendered before, the viewer would keep track of that.

> This would be significantly more efficient than a hash-map (no hash
> code calculation, better cache locality). The information item indices
> are managed by the browser and can be recycled if a node is deleted.

A std::map is not a hash map. It is a red-black tree. Lookup based on=20
pointers/integers is very efficient.

Braden