00:13.58 |
*** join/#brlcad kintel
(~kintel@unaffiliated/kintel) |
00:43.31 |
starseeker |
brlcad: openvrml is LGPLv3 - would that pose a
problem for us? (just checking to be sure) |
01:41.09 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee
(~teepee@gateway/tor-sasl/teepee) |
02:59.49 |
*** join/#brlcad archivist
(~archivist@host81-149-189-98.in-addr.btopenworld.com) |
03:10.22 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 62624
brlcad/trunk/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/CMakeLists.txt: cliff
eliminated the orle tools post deprecation in r61124, so remove
their manual pages as well |
03:16.43 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 62625
(brlcad/trunk/src/conv/CMakeLists.txt
brlcad/trunk/src/fb/CMakeLists.txt
brlcad/trunk/src/util/CMakeLists.txt): ORLE is dead, but remnants
remained. remove the unset orle include dir. |
03:20.25 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 62626
brlcad/trunk/include/CMakeLists.txt: liborle is gone, orle.h is
obsolete (deprecated 7.20) |
03:21.22 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 62627 brlcad/trunk/CHANGES:
note that the orle.h header was part of liborle |
03:21.50 |
brlcad |
starseeker: thinking about it from GCV
perspective, plug-in style |
03:23.53 |
brlcad |
we could use but not derive from them and
probably not appropriate or a good idea to have it in src/other,
but something that could be leveraged when available |
03:25.14 |
brlcad |
if there's another lib, that would be awesome
... heck the fact that it's lgpl is a good motivation if someone
wants to try and write one from scratch (ideally using a lemon(!)
and mit-licensed) |
03:25.55 |
brlcad |
it's been a while since I last looked, but if
you know of another lib with a better license, please do tell him
;) |
03:26.46 |
brlcad |
kanzure: implementing the intersections is
actually one of the easier parts .. it's doing N surfaces against M
surfaces and stitching it all together that's the really hard part
:) |
03:28.19 |
kanzure |
ah. hm. |
03:31.02 |
brlcad |
you do need PP and PC and CC and PS and CS and
SS intersections are reasonably reliable and work well so you can
just focus on stitching |
03:31.22 |
brlcad |
so it'd be interesting to compare his routines
against our implementations |
03:31.55 |
kanzure |
the one huge advantage of his source code is
that it's all written by what seems to be a single person |
03:32.15 |
brlcad |
yeah, consistent and neat |
03:34.05 |
brlcad |
wish we had more emphasis and rigor on our
public APIs, to keep things streamlined and not organically growing
on individual whims .. but it's a hard balance with progress
getting made too |
03:35.01 |
kanzure |
i get the feeling that opennurbs was a single
person originally, but then later not so much :) |
03:35.10 |
brlcad |
I say that as I try to figure out where to add
a new function myself encapsulating something I've been working
on... |
03:35.44 |
kanzure |
yeah being clean about it has high
costs |
03:35.51 |
kanzure |
moral anguish etc |
03:36.15 |
brlcad |
there are tools to help with this that I've
pondered |
03:36.20 |
brlcad |
architecture management |
03:36.54 |
kanzure |
personally i still have trouble rejecting code
contributions that are a little on the sloppy side, but otherwise
functional and good |
03:37.00 |
kanzure |
i know i should... |
03:37.14 |
brlcad |
you end up defining what libraries should
depend on what other libraries, for example, and they'll tell you
the XXX places you have violations, so you can work to weed them
out and fix them, refactor |
03:37.54 |
brlcad |
that's where I like to set the bar so far as
we can automate it |
03:39.03 |
kanzure |
can't the army just clone you or something at
this point |
03:39.07 |
kanzure |
is that option off the table? |
03:39.33 |
Stragus |
I'm sure they have, and the clones just aren't
grown up yet :) |
03:40.30 |
brlcad |
I dunno, we'd be a team of refactoring
monkeys |
03:40.43 |
brlcad |
probably end up flinging poo at each
other |
03:40.53 |
kanzure |
hey whatever it takes to write good
c |
03:40.59 |
brlcad |
hehe |
03:41.43 |
kanzure |
i'm not sure what i want to do about
verbnurbs. i could either contribute, or port it to something
else. |
03:41.52 |
brlcad |
you should see my refactoring to-do list ...
tasks I try to work on in idle time to clean up the code |
03:42.14 |
kanzure |
i have written lots of javascript, so i'm
certainly capable of contributing, but do i really want to be
locked into node and the browser for cad stuff? |
03:42.48 |
Stragus |
Eh, all that talk of cleaning up code... and I
had spent weeks recently applying serious anti-debugging techniques
on some code, that was the ugliest mess I ever made. I accept weird
jobs sometimes (that wasn't SURVICE stuff). |
03:43.04 |
brlcad |
categorized easy, medium, hard .. it's
currently 93 items ... each requiring anywhere from a couple hours
to a couple days effort |
03:43.13 |
kanzure |
browser has the benefit of being a widely
distributed platform, and node isn't completely awful i
suppose |
03:44.09 |
brlcad |
Stragus: "anti-debugging"? is that where you
intentionally inject bugs for job security? |
03:44.37 |
Stragus |
Not quite, that's where you make it as
difficult as possible for someone to run the code in a debugger and
figure things out |
03:44.59 |
brlcad |
kanzure: most of the major CAD companies have
web interfaces to their products (some like autodesk are
exceptionally complex) |
03:45.13 |
brlcad |
varying degrees of success, but a lot of "meh"
from the industry |
03:46.08 |
brlcad |
most real modeling tasks still require as fast
as hardware with as much memory as is available, so while pretty, a
web interface just tends to be overhead given a comparable client
app |
03:46.10 |
kanzure |
you wouldn't sell a cad tool in a browser, it
would be for other reasons |
03:46.49 |
kanzure |
i think it's cheaper to send nurbs over the
wire than triangles for rendering |
03:49.42 |
brlcad |
certainly, it's generally an order of
magnitude less data for "roughly comparable levels of
detail" |
03:51.43 |
kanzure |
the one use case that i can see for cad in a
browser is that sharing a modeling problem with a colleague is
easier since they don't need the cad tool already installed locally
yet |
03:51.48 |
kanzure |
but i admit this is a very niche case
heh |
03:52.50 |
kanzure |
oh, and it may be useful for cad users in big
companies that have super locked down computing environments, who
are otherwise allowed to use the interwebs |
04:41.48 |
mihaineacsu |
kanzure: are there any plans for web projects
build on node for brlcad? |
04:42.51 |
kanzure |
no node bindings |
04:43.05 |
kanzure |
there's a libffi node thing if you wanted to
play around with that |
04:44.36 |
mihaineacsu |
I'd like to get involved in something that's
javascript related as well. anybody can write javascript, but so
few can write actual good javascript. |
04:45.04 |
kanzure |
did you look at verbnurbs? |
04:45.20 |
mihaineacsu |
sorry, I have to go print my thesis. I'll
catch you later |
05:04.53 |
*** join/#brlcad mihaineacsu
(~mihaineac@109.166.134.18) |
05:06.19 |
*** join/#brlcad kintel
(~kintel@unaffiliated/kintel) |
06:04.32 |
*** join/#brlcad ``Erik
(~erik@pool-74-103-94-19.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net) |
06:19.04 |
*** join/#brlcad mihaineacsu
(~mihaineac@109.166.131.60) |
07:02.28 |
*** join/#brlcad ``Erik
(~erik@pool-74-103-94-19.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net) |
07:29.11 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 62628
brlcad/trunk/src/librt/CMakeLists.txt: add an initial routine (not
yet in use anywhere) that takes a given string with a boolean
operation and returns the boolean operation in a canonical -+u char
form. it converts various ascii/utf-8 alternatives as well as many
utf-16 and various utf-24 symbols (e.g., encountered via
copy-paste) including an exact match for the proper
union/difference |
07:29.13 |
Notify |
symbols. |
07:34.34 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee-
(bc5c2133@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.92.33.51) |
07:47.06 |
*** join/#brlcad konrado
(~konro@41.205.22.54) |
07:48.09 |
*** part/#brlcad konrado
(~konro@41.205.22.54) |
07:48.23 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee-
(bc5c2133@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.92.33.51) |
08:07.31 |
*** join/#brlcad ries
(~ries@D979EA84.cm-3-2d.dynamic.ziggo.nl) |
09:06.18 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee-
(bc5c2133@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.92.33.51) |
09:26.25 |
*** join/#brlcad luca79
(~luca@net-37-117-178-104.cust.vodafonedsl.it) |
09:37.42 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee-
(bc5c2133@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.92.33.51) |
09:42.13 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee-
(bc5c2133@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.92.33.51) |
09:56.12 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee-
(bc5c2133@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.92.33.51) |
10:19.34 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee-
(bc5c2133@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.92.33.51) |
10:57.03 |
*** join/#brlcad gurwinder
(75c76841@gateway/web/freenode/ip.117.199.104.65) |
11:01.55 |
gurwinder |
brlcad: Hello, I am trying to read .g file.
One way is by using g2asc. It shows how the entities information is
written. Is there another way to read .g file so as to understand
how information is stored in it? |
11:40.41 |
``Erik |
gurwinder: open it in mged and do 'tops' and
'ls' |
11:46.54 |
starseeker |
winces a little at the
characterization of BRL-CAD devs as "refactoring monkeys", but
can't really argue... |
11:48.35 |
starseeker |
``Erik: did you get a chance to try the new
git conversion process? |
11:56.21 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee-
(bc5c2133@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.92.33.51) |
11:57.17 |
starseeker |
brlcad: unfortunately, I don't know of a
better lib myself - X3DToolKit is LGPLv2, but we'd need to get the
Qt bits out of it and I don't actually know how close VRML really
is to X3D: http://artis.imag.fr/Software/X3D/install_unix.html |
12:01.30 |
starseeker |
if I were starting it myself, I'd probably
look at what the assimp guys did with their COLLADA importer and
try to extract that, then customize it for VRML - IIRC, COLLADA is
also XML based. |
12:03.43 |
starseeker |
actually, it might be a fun project to try and
implement an "assimp-based" convertor that used them for any
formats they support - most of them we don't really care about, but
they do list Collada, Blender 3D, a couple 3ds max formats,
Wavefront Obj, IFC/Step (??) etc... |
12:04.30 |
``Erik |
starseeker: no, ya refactor monkey, I
haven't... is there a url? I was running a 'git svn rebase'
(previously triggered, now in cron), but the svn checksum mismatch
issue has that wedged |
12:04.49 |
starseeker |
``Erik: it's in misc/svn2git |
12:04.54 |
starseeker |
start with the README |
12:05.31 |
starseeker |
it's only good for mirroring - if you start
actually working with the git repo and wanting to merge in changes
from svn as you go you'll need your older process |
12:05.48 |
starseeker |
but it should get things set up and ready to
roll quite quickly |
12:06.51 |
starseeker |
supposes you might be able
to get away with the "mirror svn" git repo being its own thing,
having your own clone where you do actual work, and do pulls from
the mirror to get changes |
12:07.09 |
starseeker |
wouldn't let you push back to the svn repo
through the git mirror though |
12:07.40 |
``Erik |
I'll have to take a look when I get some time
O.o :) |
12:13.33 |
starseeker |
yeah - assimp doesn't do threading without
boost, but otherwise is buildable as a stand-alone. If nothing
else, an importer that used their lib to load stuff into BRL-CAD
would be useful as something to compare our own home-grown
converters to, and a useful fallback if someone happens to care
about a format we're never likely to support on our own (i.e. most
game formats) |
12:14.23 |
starseeker |
doesn't help the VRML import problem though,
except insofar as studying how they handle XML based formats like
Collada |
13:13.08 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee-
(bc5c2133@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.92.33.51) |
13:27.21 |
*** join/#brlcad luca79
(~luca@net-37-117-178-104.cust.vodafonedsl.it) |
13:29.48 |
brlcad |
starseeker: the comment was about cloning me
several times .. we'd be a team of monkeys |
13:30.45 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62629
(brlcad/branches/dm-work/src/mged/chgview.c
brlcad/branches/dm-work/src/mged/dodraw.c and 2 others): For the
moment, do the same thing in MGED we did in libged to eliminate the
solid list global. If this is still necessary for performance on
today's hardware, need to hide it in gedp or somewhere similar so
it's not a global and not exposed to the application except as some
sort of |
13:30.47 |
Notify |
dl_free_mem function call. |
13:33.11 |
*** join/#brlcad kintel
(~kintel@unaffiliated/kintel) |
13:34.26 |
brlcad |
starseeker: and for the geometry conversion,
vrml was intently the goal for a variety of reasons ... x3d is
obviously related as the successor but it's not a superset or
subset or anything where you could massage an xml parser to read
the vrml - you need a vrml parser |
13:35.51 |
brlcad |
assimp would certainly be interesting for
getting all those other formats, and had them in mind for GCV for
some of the content/asset formats that are merely of periphery
interest |
13:43.28 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62630
(brlcad/branches/dm-work/include/ged.h
brlcad/branches/dm-work/src/libged/ged_private.h
brlcad/branches/dm-work/src/mged/buttons.c): Start to use some of
the dl functions from libged in mged. |
13:56.32 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62631
(brlcad/branches/dm-work/include/ged.h
brlcad/branches/dm-work/src/libged/ged_private.h and 2 others):
Clear a few FOR_ALL_SOLIDS uses, remove duplicate polybinout
logic |
13:57.25 |
starseeker |
brlcad: ah :-) |
14:02.44 |
starseeker |
nods - my other bright idea
for VRML then would be to look at Coin3D |
14:03.45 |
starseeker |
they're actually based directly on VRML, if
I'm understanding their docs correctly - don't know how hard it
would be to extract the I/O bits from all the other Coin3D stuff,
but it might be a good place to start |
14:04.23 |
starseeker |
https://bitbucket.org/Coin3D/coin/src/90465eec46422931aff11ad6f5c8430c82298771/include/Inventor/VRMLnodes/?at=default |
14:07.23 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee-
(bc5c2133@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.92.33.51) |
14:15.41 |
starseeker |
there's http://ftp.vim.org/ibiblio/devel/lang/c++/QvLib-1.0.tar.gz
which was in turn extracted from OpenInventor, but I'm not sure
what to make of its license and it's VRML 1.0 only |
14:19.50 |
starseeker |
hmm. OpenVRML is 27 megs out of the box, and
Coin3D is 40 megs |
14:20.07 |
starseeker |
takes a quick look at Coin3D
to see if it can be quickly trimmed... |
14:21.56 |
starseeker |
ah - there's a vrml97 subdirectory in
Coin3d/src |
14:22.07 |
starseeker |
that's probably the place to start |
14:22.55 |
brlcad |
coin3d would work, freewrl is
another |
14:23.15 |
starseeker |
looks like there's a precident from the VTK
world for using Coin:
http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/vtkusers/2004-May/024206.html |
14:23.33 |
brlcad |
doesn't want to do konrado's
project for him, he can figure it all out ;) |
14:23.41 |
starseeker |
heh |
14:24.43 |
brlcad |
as long as it's not a gpl code, I think we can
make just about anything else that's available work if we have
to |
14:25.00 |
starseeker |
nods |
14:25.07 |
brlcad |
the nuances of the various libs are quite
muddy in terms of what might actually save substantial dev
time |
14:25.45 |
brlcad |
and heck, if he really wanted to write a
parser himself and he sticks with it, more power to him ... it is
tractable, just not recommended |
14:26.04 |
starseeker |
nods |
14:26.38 |
teepee- |
shakes head |
14:26.40 |
teepee- |
;) |
14:26.48 |
starseeker |
is seriously tempted to make
a gconv tool using assimp, just for grins... |
14:27.45 |
starseeker |
would love to compare the results to our
polygonal conversion toolset - might replace several of them in one
swoop |
14:28.41 |
brlcad |
I'd probably give coin3d a try myself, it
looks fairly contained and it's quite active |
14:28.58 |
starseeker |
if I'm not mistaken, it's used by the FreeCAD
team |
14:28.58 |
brlcad |
that's the point of GCV, though, that we
should be able to have N plugins using these different
implementations, and we can compare them |
14:29.11 |
brlcad |
it is, so we'd share similar problems
;) |
14:30.06 |
starseeker |
nods - once the gcv API is
stubbed in, we should be able to go to town |
14:31.59 |
brlcad |
teepee-: so you want to write a parser
yourself you say? :) |
14:33.10 |
starseeker |
hehehe |
14:33.23 |
*** join/#brlcad teepee-
(bc5c2133@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.92.33.51) |
14:34.17 |
teepee- |
nope, I'd say writing parsers yourself is
widely underestimated |
14:34.30 |
teepee- |
especially in case of XML based formats
:) |
14:35.05 |
Stragus |
It's generally not too hard either, if you
have done some and can reuse a bunch of code... |
14:35.30 |
teepee- |
it's not _hard_ but it's very hard to get it
complete |
14:35.42 |
starseeker |
it's also a nightmare to debug |
14:36.06 |
teepee- |
like namespaces / xml-include and all the
fancy stuff not everybody uses everyday in case of XML |
14:36.53 |
Stragus |
Ow. Yes right, I meant the basic syntax, never
heard of XML namespaces or includes |
14:36.53 |
teepee- |
more examples... hand-made OpenSCAD script
parser (very bad error handling, can't provide correct line numbers
with includes) |
14:37.16 |
teepee- |
or the DXF parser which only supports part of
the entities |
14:38.00 |
teepee- |
Stragus: that's exactly the point. the basic
stuff is easy indeed. but someone might want to use the extended
features... it's in the spec, so it's possible to use,
right? |
14:38.22 |
teepee- |
for grins, just have a look at SVG files
exported by Inkscape |
14:38.26 |
Stragus |
Right, I got your point now :) |
14:38.48 |
Stragus |
I wrote a XML parser and didn't implement
anything beyond what I could see in the files I deal with |
14:38.53 |
starseeker |
still wants to look at
https://bitbucket.org/Coin3D/dime
to see what it can do with DXF... that would definitely be one to
compare with assimp and our own DXF abilities. |
14:39.02 |
Stragus |
(and a JSON parser, and a parser for my own
little programming language, etc.) |
14:39.30 |
kintel |
starseeker: FYI, I was on the Coin3D dev
team |
14:39.49 |
teepee- |
fun example https://openclipart.org/people/liftarn/splat.svg |
14:39.54 |
kintel |
starseeker: ..but itâs not actively
developed any longer, so it |
14:39.59 |
kintel |
âs a bit risky IMO |
14:40.05 |
brlcad |
good to know |
14:40.43 |
kintel |
But I know that a number of projects have used
it for the VRML parser alone ;) |
14:40.46 |
starseeker |
kintel: in that situation my approach would be
to try and isolate the I/O aspects that pertain to reading/writing
VRML files, and make a new library based on those |
14:41.00 |
starseeker |
sort of "dime for VRML" |
14:41.46 |
starseeker |
kintel: how is the code, in that respect?
Would that be a major effort? |
14:41.50 |
kintel |
starseeker: depends on which subset of VRML
you want to support I guess, but the core geometry nodes should be
easy |
14:42.21 |
kintel |
not sure how easy it would be to rip out the
parser, as youâd need all the nodes |
14:42.32 |
starseeker |
what do the nodes depend on? |
14:42.51 |
kintel |
..and the nodes depend on traversals, which
again offer a bunch of virtual functions for GL rendering
etc. |
14:42.57 |
kintel |
..but you could probably stub away most of
that |
14:43.31 |
kintel |
It was never designed to be separate. Itâs
been half a decade since I looked at the code though : / |
14:44.18 |
kintel |
the far easiest would be to build and use the
lib as is I think |
14:44.18 |
starseeker |
nods - the other approach in
that situation is to just start ripping out anything that isn't
necessary to the VRML I/O and boil it down, rather than trying to
extract a subset |
14:44.53 |
kintel |
as long as FreeCAD is alive and using Coin, it
should be relatively safe |
14:46.16 |
kintel |
but once starting on vrml, there is VRML1.0.
VRML97, X3D etc. - didnât the X3D guys release some software for
parsing them all - or at least converting VRML97 into the
VRML-compatible subset of X3D ? |
14:46.30 |
brlcad |
openvrml does them all iirc |
14:47.30 |
brlcad |
think freewrl does too |
14:47.45 |
brlcad |
both seem pretty active and are listed on the
x3d resources page |
14:51.25 |
starseeker |
libgcv should give us the opportunity to try
out different libs (or, even better, have lots of student projects
try out different libs ;-) and do an objective assessment of
relative merits |
14:51.25 |
brlcad |
still, this is all over-eager problem solving
of a new dev's coding problem ... |
14:51.31 |
brlcad |
he should be the one to figure out what will
work and be interesting to him |
14:51.48 |
brlcad |
don't want to kill his motivation, which
thinking through a lot of this for him easily could |
14:52.00 |
starseeker |
fair enough |
14:52.15 |
brlcad |
it's not a priority format to say the least,
that's why it really doesn't matter in many ways |
14:52.27 |
starseeker |
braces his own motivation
and heads back into MGED's drawing code... |
14:52.39 |
brlcad |
which by the way is looking awesome |
14:52.48 |
brlcad |
you're eliminating really old drawing code
cruft... |
14:53.49 |
starseeker |
brlcad: thanks :-). I'm still leading up to
the real challenge though - some parts of MGED's actual feature set
are built around the "bu_list of solid objects", and reworking
those is going to be more than just a refactor |
14:54.41 |
starseeker |
may end up just having to figure out what the
feature actually *is* as step one... ugh |
15:08.50 |
brlcad |
is it possible to hold off changing something
that fundamental until the branch is merged? |
15:09.23 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62632
(brlcad/branches/gct/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/gdiff2.xml
brlcad/branches/gct/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/pixinterp2x.xml and
97 others): Sync with trunk up to r62573 |
15:09.51 |
brlcad |
the further down the rabbit hole you get, the
messier the divergence |
15:10.56 |
brlcad |
much of what you're doing now could have been
on trunk, for example, but it's intertwined with the dm
work |
15:12.35 |
starseeker |
urm. the difficulty is I need to get this
direct manipulation of individual solids out of all the
apps |
15:13.08 |
brlcad |
sure |
15:13.11 |
brlcad |
I know that pain well actually |
15:13.18 |
starseeker |
brlcad: what about this? if we branch now for
7.26.0 and cherrypick the key updates between now and then, I could
merge after that |
15:14.19 |
starseeker |
then we avoid the massive breakage of
everything external for 7.26.0, which is the main reason I'm in the
branch to begin with |
15:16.03 |
starseeker |
well, that and the fairly high risk of
breaking a feature or hurting performance or something like that
with such major changes... |
15:16.22 |
starseeker |
both of which argue for needing a 7.26.0
branch before I pile back into trunk |
15:16.36 |
brlcad |
it's not so much about merging the branch as
it is having the branch changing N things at once instead of 1
thing |
15:16.44 |
brlcad |
plus, that'd really violates how a release
branch is supposed to function |
15:16.53 |
brlcad |
and I think that's not helpful for a variety
of reasons |
15:17.21 |
brlcad |
and there are other things playing into what
makes 7.26 by the end-of-FY |
15:18.00 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:carlmoore * 62633
brlcad/trunk/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/pixscale.xml: some of my
'routine' fixes, and also remove -h, which has already been removed
for high-res in the program |
15:18.11 |
brlcad |
you're definitely right about affecting
performance, though, so maybe it should just wait anyways |
15:18.29 |
brlcad |
at least I saw when you removed the vlist
pooling... yikes :) |
15:18.32 |
starseeker |
brlcad: I guess I didn't really see my changes
as hitting mulitple things - to me, it's all rolled up into the
same task of making our code "scenegraph ready" |
15:18.37 |
brlcad |
that's one of the targets for my memory
allocator |
15:19.01 |
starseeker |
I expect to add that back in, but I'll be
doing it in a way that doesn't involve globals in libged |
15:20.28 |
brlcad |
making our code "scenegraph ready" is
incredibly vague and open to debate and creep without really
defining what that means, otherwise any you could just about
justify any code change that interacts, no? :) |
15:21.21 |
Stragus |
That sounds like two words management would
say :) |
15:21.22 |
brlcad |
I'm just looking at it from an architecture
perspective, and there are now about a half-dozen signficant
changes coming down the pipeline in that branch |
15:21.47 |
starseeker |
well, sort of - my specific interpretation was
that libdm takes as inputs a set of db_full_paths and view_objects
(vlists and text for the latter) and leaves the details to the
backend |
15:22.04 |
brlcad |
they're all good, but it's a LOT of change and
not strictly all "necessary", just good stuff that "should" get
changed |
15:24.51 |
starseeker |
brlcad: so you'd prefer that I wait until I
can merge back into trunk before diverging further? |
15:25.14 |
starseeker |
I could figure out how to put the vlist
pooling back in in the meantime... |
15:27.28 |
brlcad |
I think the divergence pendulum has already
swung pretty damn far (not saying that's a good thing or bad thing,
but it's probably a great thing) ... I mean how many lines are you
at now if you diff trunk ... you're probably pushing 50k
lines |
15:28.38 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62634
(brlcad/branches/gct/CHANGES
brlcad/branches/gct/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/CMakeLists.txt and
19 others): Sync with trunk up to r62631 |
15:29.03 |
brlcad |
that's invariably high risk and lots of issues
(rule of bugs), so it's really just trying to keep diverging
further "to as much a minimum as you can manage without halting
your progress" |
15:29.41 |
starseeker |
yeah, it's probably a big diff |
15:29.54 |
brlcad |
if you HAVE to change something, you have to
change it ... this is all the right direction to be going in
regardless, it's just risky from a change management perspective to
have such a huge branch go for this long without a
mergeback |
15:30.17 |
brlcad |
is there anything you're working on that could
be done on trunk and pulled to your branch? |
15:30.31 |
starseeker |
hmm |
15:30.33 |
brlcad |
one way to keep it to a minimum |
15:30.46 |
brlcad |
again, if you can't .. carry on and we'll
deal |
15:32.03 |
starseeker |
yeah, I kinda shot myself in the foot in that
respect by switching dm and fb to hidden structs with accessor
functions up front |
15:32.12 |
starseeker |
oppsie |
15:32.14 |
brlcad |
but if you can ... I think it's worth it as
the risk and impact does increase exponentially as time increases
(invariably, you're already doing the best you can) |
15:33.09 |
starseeker |
I could try to introduce those changes (hide
fb and dm) in trunk now - that would greatly reduce the divergence
in lines of code |
15:33.27 |
starseeker |
unfortunately, that's also guaranteed to break
external dm/fb users :-) |
15:33.51 |
brlcad |
hmmm |
15:34.02 |
brlcad |
what about all the display list changes from
the past several days |
15:34.20 |
brlcad |
most of that was updating our tools to do
things differently |
15:34.44 |
starseeker |
I could try - the key there is how much the
code I moved around was accessing dm/fb |
15:34.55 |
brlcad |
nods |
15:35.10 |
starseeker |
if it wasn't (I'll have to check) then I might
be able to do most of it ('cept for the vlist pooling
stuff) |
15:35.46 |
brlcad |
the vlist pooling is another issue altogether,
that might end up being a conflict if the branch lives too
long |
15:36.37 |
brlcad |
like I said, that's a specific place I was
looking at to put the new allocator to use, so I wouldn't worry
about it either way |
15:37.06 |
starseeker |
the only real reason I ripped that out was to
avoid the explicit solids list exposure - I can try being more
careful and putting it in gedp as a void or something like
that |
15:37.11 |
brlcad |
I didn't do it on trunk yet because of
7.26 |
15:38.40 |
brlcad |
nods, and really a lot of
place that was used, they didn't actually need the vlist data ..
they needed the paths |
15:39.29 |
brlcad |
maybe the best path to not waste time is just
to check your diff and see what, if anything can be merged now,
cherry picked or otherwise massaged to reduce the trunk
diff |
15:40.05 |
starseeker |
I'll take a look |
15:40.25 |
brlcad |
if that list is zero, so be it, that'd due
diligence |
15:40.32 |
starseeker |
brlcad: so I know better next time, what would
have been the better way to approach something like this? |
15:40.35 |
brlcad |
s/due/be due/ |
15:43.42 |
brlcad |
probably just narrowing the scope of the
branch ... which is hard here because there is so much research
that was going on simultaneously |
15:43.51 |
starseeker |
hmm - I might be able to add in the
bu_structparse changes without too much disruption. That amounts
to adding a NULL to anything not using the new passthru,
IIRC. |
15:44.11 |
brlcad |
it's a lot like the nmg branch in that
respect, depth first instead of breadth first changes |
15:44.28 |
brlcad |
for example, all the dm API hiding / changing
probably should have been last not first |
15:46.33 |
starseeker |
can see that... main idea
there was to get all the X/ogl/whatever specific logic stuffed as
far down as I could so I wouldn't have to introduce and then remove
the equalivents for osg, but it did toss me off into the wilderness
changeset wise |
15:48.55 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62635
(brlcad/branches/gecode/CHANGES
brlcad/branches/gecode/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/CMakeLists.txt
and 19 others): Sync with trunk up to r62631 |
15:50.23 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62636
(brlcad/branches/bullet/CHANGES
brlcad/branches/bullet/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/CMakeLists.txt
and 19 others): Sync with trunk up to r62631 |
15:50.40 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62637
(brlcad/branches/osg/CHANGES
brlcad/branches/osg/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/CMakeLists.txt and
19 others): Sync with trunk up to r62631 |
15:51.01 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62638
(brlcad/branches/rel8/CHANGES
brlcad/branches/rel8/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/CMakeLists.txt and
19 others): Sync with trunk up to r62631 |
15:51.25 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62639
(brlcad/branches/dm-work/CHANGES
brlcad/branches/dm-work/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/CMakeLists.txt
and 19 others): Sync with trunk up to r62631 |
15:53.08 |
brlcad |
yeah, architecture change-wise -- and mostly
just thinking out loud -- there was the addition of a new dm,
changed dm API / hidden structs, new dm API (better way of doing
things), changed object display management, new display methods,
updated tools to new display method, ... probably a few other
things I'm missing |
15:54.50 |
starseeker |
come to think of it - in principle, ripping
out dg.h and friends might be doable in trunk |
15:55.09 |
brlcad |
yeah, the elimination of the obj stuff .. that
sh!t can go |
15:55.27 |
starseeker |
main ugly bit is needing to stuff wdb_obj.c in
mged so it's Tcl commands still work - didn't have time to boil
that down into a cleaner solution |
15:55.41 |
brlcad |
nods |
15:55.57 |
starseeker |
still, hard to claim it's more ugly than
leaving all the rest of it there... |
15:56.11 |
brlcad |
anyways, not second-guessing your progress,
like I said -- this is all great stuff I'm seeing |
15:56.40 |
brlcad |
I'm just shuddering at the branch on the whole
from a risk management perspective, it's definitely in the
"medium-high" category now :) |
15:57.11 |
starseeker |
heh - that doesn't even count the
openscenegraph stuff in the other branches, if you really want
nightmares :-P |
15:57.23 |
starseeker |
fortunately, most of that shouldn't have to
merge at all |
15:57.43 |
starseeker |
it'll just guide the "real"
implementation |
16:01.13 |
starseeker |
brlcad: actually, what I might be able to do
is introduce the new dm (and maybe even fb) API functions and calls
and such, but not hide the dm and fb structs themselves |
16:01.44 |
starseeker |
I'll have to look into that a bit, but what
should really cause the breakage for external codes is not being
able to access struct members directly |
16:02.10 |
starseeker |
adding new members is nothing new - Bob's done
it several times - so if I do everything but the final "hide" it
might still fly |
16:24.36 |
brlcad |
nods, sounds
great |
16:32.57 |
Stragus |
I'm actually surprised you went the
OpenSceneGraph route. I thought that was a bad decision when...
another unnamed piece of software took that route. |
16:33.27 |
Stragus |
It's really just a big and very heavy wrapper
around legacy OpenGL, with gaps and giant holes in terms of modern
functionalities |
16:35.04 |
Stragus |
still can't believe that
library needs 240000 active malloc() calls to render a
cube |
16:42.37 |
starseeker |
Stragus: a lot of the work that is being done
is to get our codebase ready to work with an external scenegraph -
in that sense, it doesn't really matter what backend we're looking
at |
16:43.31 |
starseeker |
OpenSceneGraph does at least hide the platform
ugliness - as matters stand right now, we have one dm/fb
implementation for glx, another for wgl, and we don't work at all
on native Apple OpenGL |
16:44.48 |
starseeker |
it's also fairly easy to embed in BRL-CAD's
build. |
16:45.20 |
Stragus |
Right, glfw is a great alternative to hide the
platform ugliness |
16:45.40 |
starseeker |
my hope is that once this gigantic code
scrubbing is done, it will be *much* easier for us to put <new
shiny solution> under BRL-CAD, however that may change from year
to year |
16:45.43 |
Stragus |
And it's a lot more flexible and complete to
create contexts with modern functionalities |
16:46.38 |
starseeker |
nods - I'm familiar with
glfw, and actually used it at one point. It doesn't provide a
scenegraph, however |
16:47.57 |
starseeker |
we need to get our API to the point where
applications aren't expected to micromanage their drawing the way
MGED currently does. Even if all that just moves down to a
library, it will allow for the future insertion of other drawing
managers instead of completely locking us out of that
space |
16:49.56 |
Stragus |
Indeed. Having your own drawing manager would
seem appropriate to me (on top of glew/glfw3 to hide the ugly
stuff) |
16:53.21 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62640
(brlcad/trunk/include/bu/magic.h brlcad/trunk/include/bu/parse.h
and 60 others): Merge in all libbu changes and related tweaks from
dm-work@r62639 to trunk, and make local alterations to trunk code
to work with the libbu changes. The new magic numbers are harmless,
as is the bu_struct_parse change if NULL is passed for the new
parameter. Right now these updates aren't in use by any
code |
16:53.23 |
Notify |
in trunk, but they help reduce the size of the
diff between the branches. |
16:57.00 |
starseeker |
Stragus: practically speaking, BRL-CAD isn't
in a position yet to take advantage of any of the "modern" stuff
when it comes to OpenGL - we're still doing wireframes and, if
you're lucky, shaded bots. Our NURBS shading is coming online,
which is the game changer, but that's still being shaken out in
testing at the moment. |
16:58.32 |
starseeker |
Stragus: you know quite a lot about this - do
you have any familiarity with this work? http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~keenan/Projects/SpinTransformations/ |
17:00.09 |
starseeker |
once we can do shaded displays for everything,
textures become more interesting... |
17:00.32 |
Stragus |
I'm not familiar with that paper at first
glance, reading it may reveal common techniques |
17:00.39 |
Stragus |
Indeed |
17:01.11 |
starseeker |
if it's as cool as the figures suggest, the
open source implementation makes it of real interest for quick
testing... |
17:01.41 |
Stragus |
Also, eventually, one day, it could be nice to
render CSG geometry directly by running the raytracer on
CUDA/OpenCL |
17:03.56 |
starseeker |
that would be cool - I know brlcad and some
students have looked into that a bit |
17:04.27 |
starseeker |
iirc, it pretty much involves doing on the
raytracing side what I'm working on now on the graphics side (i.e.,
lots of changes to data flows) |
17:05.10 |
Stragus |
Regarding that URL: The screenshots make it a
lot clearer and simpler than what the abstract and introduction
suggest. I have implemented something similar once, although most
probably not as fancy |
17:06.37 |
Stragus |
My technique was just stretching the texture
to try to maintain a same "scale" everywhere, converging on some
solution |
17:11.47 |
starseeker |
cool |
17:12.30 |
starseeker |
once we're through all this grunt work, I'm
really hoping we'll be more easily able to play with that sort of
cool, immediately user visible niftyness |
17:15.10 |
starseeker |
unfortunately, that point is probably after
the Tk->Qt migration too (speaking of grunt work) |
17:21.31 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62641
(brlcad/trunk/include/CMakeLists.txt brlcad/trunk/include/ged.h and
46 others): Remove dg.h and friends, per dm-work branch commit
62532. Things to note - this removes the old gdiff tool - while the
new one should functionally do what is needed, testing and user
feedback are in order. Also mged gets a modified wdb_obj.c stuffed
into it to define its tcl commands until someone can come |
17:21.33 |
Notify |
in and clean that up properly. |
17:27.44 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62642
(brlcad/branches/gecode/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/pixscale.xml
brlcad/branches/gecode/include/CMakeLists.txt and 104 others): Sync
with trunk up to r62641 |
17:28.21 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62643
(brlcad/branches/bullet/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/pixscale.xml
brlcad/branches/bullet/include/CMakeLists.txt and 104 others): Sync
with trunk up to r62641 |
17:28.43 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62644
(brlcad/branches/osg/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/pixscale.xml
brlcad/branches/osg/include/CMakeLists.txt and 103 others): Sync
with trunk up to r62641 |
17:29.31 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62645
(brlcad/branches/rel8/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/pixscale.xml
brlcad/branches/rel8/include/CMakeLists.txt and 104 others): Sync
with trunk up to r62641 |
17:34.39 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62646
(brlcad/branches/dm-work/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/pixscale.xml
Property Changed: and 2 others): Sync with trunk up to
r62641 |
17:35.32 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62647
(brlcad/branches/gct/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/pixscale.xml
brlcad/branches/gct/include/CMakeLists.txt and 104 others): Sync
with trunk up to r62641 |
17:36.28 |
*** join/#brlcad mihaineacsu
(~mihaineac@109.166.131.174) |
18:07.22 |
*** join/#brlcad mihaineacsu
(~mihaineac@92.81.155.32) |
18:32.46 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62648
(brlcad/trunk/doc/docbook/system/man3/en/libfb.xml
brlcad/trunk/doc/html/ReleaseNotes/email4.0.html and 188 others):
Sync dm-work efforts through 62497, plus fix to tclcad_obj.c from
62580, into trunk. This is the 'hide dm and fb' effort. In order to
make this work in trunk, we need to temporarily rework the updates
to still allow struct dm and struct fb to be part of the public API
so |
18:32.48 |
Notify |
code explicitly accessing struct members can
still do so (that mechanism will go away after 7.26). Rather than
compliate this commit with those struct changes, they will be done
in a follow-on commit. |
18:35.40 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:carlmoore * 62649
brlcad/trunk/src/util/pixscale.c: add 'h' to comment |
18:38.44 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:carlmoore * 62650
(brlcad/trunk/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/obj-g.xml
brlcad/trunk/src/conv/obj-g.c): rearrange the options in Usage and
manpage; change -h, which is not for hi-res, to -H; shut off a
redundant bu_log |
18:44.52 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:carlmoore * 62651
brlcad/trunk/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/obj-g.xml: oops, -h was
referred to in 2 other places, so change those occurrences to
-H |
18:46.24 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62652
(brlcad/trunk/include/dm.h brlcad/trunk/include/fb.h): Expose the
internal headers for the structs. This may still require changing
struct definitions from struct dm to either just dm or struct
dm_internal... |
18:47.46 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 62653 brlcad/trunk/CHANGES:
tighten up the wording on the three change types and note that dg.h
is now obsolete (it wasn't documented here but was documented in
the file itself as deprecated) |
18:52.13 |
starseeker |
brlcad: if that or some variation on it will
work, it's most of the pre-display-list work in the dm-work branch.
Unless there's trouble I'll get a preserve-the-freesolid-lists
version of the libged refactor in next |
18:53.15 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 62654 brlcad/trunk/NEWS:
the bug fix is supplanted with the removal of gdiff. annotate the
rewrite of gdiff (still need to move the files/rename the binary)
by cliff to improve an overhauled geometry diffing
capability. |
18:56.08 |
brlcad |
i'm seeing some minor issuse in the 62648
merge |
18:56.20 |
brlcad |
doc files that got updated
erroneously |
18:56.46 |
starseeker |
I think there were a couple that got FBIO
changed... |
18:57.41 |
starseeker |
yeah - email4.0.html and libfb.xml. I guess
the former at least shouldn't have been changed? |
18:59.06 |
brlcad |
well they both look wrong, but yeah definitely
not the e-mail :) |
18:59.31 |
brlcad |
no rewriting history to suit your evil
plans |
19:00.02 |
starseeker |
I'll put that one back - libfb.xml should have
been updated but I probably didn't do it right |
19:00.45 |
brlcad |
so reviewing public API changes, fbio.h
elimination ... where did RGBpixel end up? |
19:01.02 |
starseeker |
fb.h |
19:01.04 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62655
brlcad/trunk/doc/html/ReleaseNotes/email4.0.html: Historical
documentation, not living documentation - restore |
19:02.04 |
brlcad |
can you annotate that in CHANGES, minimally
impacting change of #include fbio.h to fb.h (so anything that might
have been construed as non-struct public is now provided by
fb.h) |
19:02.18 |
starseeker |
ah, sure |
19:03.55 |
brlcad |
I'm basing the struct changes on the notion
that we've never actually published or documented that anywhere,
but I'm pretty sure I've seen some of the little tidbits like
RGBpixel in use |
19:04.06 |
starseeker |
brlcad: minor nitnoid - how come the minor
changes go low->high release number down the page, but the
deprecated/obsolete sections go the other way? |
19:04.14 |
brlcad |
so structs can go on whim, but still good to
note the entire header going poof |
19:05.25 |
brlcad |
starseeker: frankly, for efficiency |
19:05.41 |
brlcad |
new items only have to get added to the top,
so no searching to add |
19:05.46 |
starseeker |
nods |
19:05.52 |
brlcad |
can jump to the bottom to add minimally
impacting |
19:05.59 |
starseeker |
ah :-) |
19:06.26 |
starseeker |
makes sense - caught me off guard, initially
though you would have gone for uniform ordering ;-) |
19:06.32 |
brlcad |
makes them inconsistent with each other, but I
figure we will spend FAR more time editing that file than others
will reading it to notice that |
19:06.37 |
starseeker |
so this will be the first 7.26
change? |
19:06.55 |
brlcad |
er, shouldn't be... |
19:07.08 |
starseeker |
sees only 7.24 at the
bottom... |
19:07.15 |
brlcad |
ahh, yeah, the marker is missing |
19:07.19 |
brlcad |
is goes somewhere in there... |
19:07.42 |
starseeker |
after the last 7.23? |
19:07.49 |
brlcad |
yeah |
19:07.54 |
brlcad |
i think right before
bu_kill_parallel |
19:07.57 |
brlcad |
but lemme check |
19:09.24 |
brlcad |
yep, that looks like where it goes |
19:09.52 |
starseeker |
k - regex coming up |
19:10.00 |
brlcad |
and all those 7.24's should be 7.25 |
19:10.39 |
brlcad |
(the three or so minimally impacting in the
7.26 cat should be 7.25) |
19:10.50 |
starseeker |
and the ones above the new 7.26 should be
7.23? |
19:11.42 |
brlcad |
no, they were changed in 7.24 |
19:12.14 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62656
brlcad/trunk/CHANGES: Add the 7.26 header, update release numbers,
add fbio.h -> fb.h regex |
19:12.25 |
starseeker |
there we go :-) |
19:12.32 |
brlcad |
the [] reflect what was in include/conf when
the change was made, the label reflects which release that was
published |
19:13.30 |
starseeker |
generally speaking, should I try to add
CHANGES lines in branches for merging, or add them in trunk after
the merge? |
19:14.05 |
brlcad |
probably best to do them in the branch as you
make the changes so there's less chance they get
overlooked |
19:14.22 |
brlcad |
and they get merged as the change is
merged |
19:14.39 |
brlcad |
same with news |
19:16.36 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62657
brlcad/trunk/doc/docbook/system/man3/en/libfb.xml: Fix fb_NULL
search-and-replace fail. |
19:31.27 |
starseeker |
brlcad: if you prefer to play save with gdiff
we can add it back in for 7.26 - I was mostly being lazy in the
branch, but since we're merging in at this point I can go back and
have a go at unraveling it. |
19:46.58 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:n_reed * 62658
(brlcad/branches/brep-debug/AUTHORS
brlcad/branches/brep-debug/CHANGES and 393 others): sync from trunk
through r62657 |
20:10.52 |
brlcad |
starseeker: your call, I'm good with replacing
if you think the new is stable enough and featured for
use |
20:11.45 |
brlcad |
maybe try a little script that gdiff's all our
sample dbs against all others with all the various gdiff options
just to see if you can get bad behavior |
20:17.45 |
*** join/#brlcad vladbogo
(~vlad@188.25.101.43) |
20:25.49 |
*** join/#brlcad vladbogo
(~vlad@188.25.101.43) |
20:49.48 |
starseeker |
vladbogo: howdy! |
20:51.11 |
vladbogo |
starseeker: hi |
20:52.35 |
starseeker |
vladbogo: apologies if I managed to break any
of the Qt code with that last batch of commits - I'll try to remedy
any errors tonight |
20:53.34 |
vladbogo |
starseeker: no worries, I only saw a duplicate
case in tclcad_obj |
20:54.49 |
starseeker |
vladbogo: had a chance to see what's involved
with replacing the Tk window with a Qt version? |
20:55.15 |
starseeker |
is (over)optimistically
thinking that could be as simple as window creation logic and key
bindings... |
20:56.32 |
starseeker |
brlcad: hmm, good idea (script) |
20:58.29 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:carlmoore * 62659
brlcad/trunk/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/nirt.xml: use
<command>nirt</command> more often |
20:59.27 |
vladbogo |
starseeker: I've taken a brief look and it
shouldn't involve much more than, as you said, keybindings and
event processing |
20:59.38 |
starseeker |
cool |
21:00.17 |
vladbogo |
so I was thinking about giving a try in the
next few weeks to see what it comes up |
21:00.27 |
starseeker |
awesome |
21:01.07 |
vladbogo |
so I'll create a new branch and start working
and come back with updates |
21:01.56 |
starseeker |
sounds good - if any of the dm/fb shuffle
that's going on with my stuff starts causing trouble (bad
interactions with Qt, whatever) don't hesitate to let me
know |
21:02.30 |
vladbogo |
ok, I will |
21:04.25 |
starseeker |
proceeds to diff everything
with everything... |
21:04.35 |
vladbogo |
since I haven't worked with branches in svn,
is svn copy all I need in order to create a new branch? |
21:04.44 |
starseeker |
yep - very easy |
21:05.16 |
starseeker |
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.branchmerge.using.html |
21:05.42 |
starseeker |
main trick for BRL-CAD is to put the branch in
the right place |
21:06.06 |
vladbogo |
thanks |
21:06.39 |
starseeker |
so for this it'd be https://svn.code.sf.net/p/brlcad/code/brlcad/branches/qtged
(or whatever you wanted to name it) |
21:08.11 |
vladbogo |
that's what I thought that the location will
be |
21:08.13 |
vladbogo |
thanks |
21:08.37 |
starseeker |
most people get it right - I'm the only one in
recent memory who put his in the wrong place ;-) |
21:10.13 |
starseeker |
and whadya know, gdiff did crash... let's see
why... |
21:15.16 |
starseeker |
dsp... figures... |
21:17.58 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:n_reed * 62660
brlcad/branches/brep-debug/src/libbrep/boolean.cpp: fix copy-paste
error |
21:20.35 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:vladbogo * 62661 (svn:ignore ## -0,0
+1,2 ## and 2 others): Created a Qt branch. |
22:04.46 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:carlmoore * 62662
brlcad/trunk/doc/docbook/system/man1/en/nirt.xml: touch up, and add
a missing right bracket |
22:29.41 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62663
(brlcad/trunk/NEWS brlcad/trunk/src/librt/primitives/dsp/dsp.c):
Fix bug in g2asc/asc2g handling of dsp primitive - round trip
wasn't working previously. |
22:38.34 |
starseeker |
brlcad: when I gdiff2 goliath.g with itself,
I'm getting some sort of weird corrupted memory crash that seems to
be mixed up with db_dircheck and bu_log |
22:40.28 |
starseeker |
I'm thinking that diffing a file with itself
isn't going to be a big thing, and it's not clear to me this is
gdiff2's fault... |
23:03.19 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62664
brlcad/trunk/src/gtools/gdiff2/gdiff2.c: Free search results from
diff |
23:10.57 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 62665
brlcad/trunk/src/gtools/gdiff2/gdiff2.c: Catch cases of identical
files up front for gdiff2 |
23:11.04 |
starseeker |
hooray for input validation |
23:38.20 |
*** join/#brlcad kintel
(~kintel@unaffiliated/kintel) |