headers
Chris Haarmeijer | 4 Sep 2003 13:57
Picon

offline rendering

I was wondering. Most game-development companies do some kind of raytracing
to generate normalmaps, lightmaps, SH lighting, vertexlighting, etc. Is
anyone using hardware acceleration already for this (GPU or distributed
rendering) or are companies interested in middleware (some kind of SDK) that
plugs into their custom software to perform hardware intersection tests ?

Regards,
Chris
---
Keep IT Simple Software
Van Alphenstraat 12
7514 DD Enschede

W: http://www.keepitsimple.nl
E: mailto:info <at> keepitsimple.nl
T: +31 53 4356687

_______________________________________________
Sweng-gamedev mailing list
Sweng-gamedev <at> lists.midnightryder.com
http://lists.midnightryder.com/listinfo.cgi/sweng-gamedev-midnightryder.com
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Johan Andersson | 4 Sep 2003 20:52
Picon
Favicon

RE: offline rendering

We have a custom distributed GPU-based lightmap renderer for our current
project (Rallisport Challenge 2 for Xbox) that works really well. It was
quite complicated to create because it's massivly threaded and works
directly with all of our engine formats (but outside of our Xbox
specific engine), but it sure was time well spent.. 

--
Johan Andersson
Engine & Rendering Programmer
Rallisport 2
Digital Illusions

-----Original Message-----
From: sweng-gamedev-midnightryder.com-admin <at> lists.midnightryder.com
[mailto:sweng-gamedev-midnightryder.com-admin <at> lists.midnightryder.com]
On Behalf Of Chris Haarmeijer
Sent: den 4 september 2003 13:57
To: sweng
Subject: [Sweng-gamedev] offline rendering

I was wondering. Most game-development companies do some kind of
raytracing to generate normalmaps, lightmaps, SH lighting,
vertexlighting, etc. Is anyone using hardware acceleration already for
this (GPU or distributed
rendering) or are companies interested in middleware (some kind of SDK)
that plugs into their custom software to perform hardware intersection
tests ?

Regards,
Chris
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Peter Lipson | 18 Sep 2003 19:32
Favicon

nameless object constructor vs. operator()


There was a discussion of this a while back, regarding confusion of whether
class Bif{...};
...
Bif();
...

 was getting the constructor or the operator() called. Does it ring a bell
with anyone? I can't find it in my records, nor figure out how to phrase the
question for Google!

what raised this? well, one of the programmers here wrote:

class Chuck
{
  Chuck(sometype *op){}
};

 but in his code has

...
  if(testcase)
    Chuck(functionReturningOp());

 and the compiler didn't accept it. Sorry, I don't have more specific
information about this case - I'm just hoping to find a discussion of
something similar to this that I'm pretty sure was on this list...

Peter
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Tom Plunket | 19 Sep 2003 04:45

Re: nameless object constructor vs. operator()

> There was a discussion of this a while back, regarding
> confusion of whether
> class Bif{...};
> ...
> Bif();
> ...
>
> was getting the constructor or the operator() called. Does it
> ring a bell with anyone?

Neither.  Well, it's constructing a Bif object, so I guess
technically it's getting the constructor called, but
technically it's constructing rather than calling a function.

Generally, your best bet is to trawl through the C++ FAQ LITE. 
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/

> what raised this? well, one of the programmers here wrote:
>
> class Chuck
> {
>   Chuck(sometype *op){}
> };
>
>  but in his code has
>
> ...
>   if(testcase)
>     Chuck(functionReturningOp());
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Gareth Lewin | 19 Sep 2003 08:51
Picon

RE: nameless object constructor vs. operator()

I haven't tested it, but surely you need a this pointer for the () operator
unless it's static (in which case you would do Bif::() or Bif::operator() ?)

So Bif() should be the constructor.

That's what my logic says.

It's very easy to test though :)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Lipson [mailto:peter <at> toysforbob.com]
> Sent: 18 September 2003 18:32
> To: sweng-gamedev <at> midnightryder.com
> Subject: [Sweng-gamedev] nameless object constructor vs. operator()
> 
> 
> 
> There was a discussion of this a while back, regarding 
> confusion of whether
> class Bif{...};
> ...
> Bif();
> ...
> 
>  was getting the constructor or the operator() called. Does 
> it ring a bell
> with anyone? I can't find it in my records, nor figure out 
> how to phrase the
> question for Google!
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |

Gmane