You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Since version 0.9.6.0, GLM broke compatibility with previous versions to use radians instead of degrees.
I'd gladly make a PR to fix this in the code/articles, but I was wondering if it was more desirable to do e.g glm::radians(45.0f), or simply 3.1415f/4.f, or use const float pi = std::acos(-1);, and do pi/4.f?
I personally think glm::radians(45.0f) is more understandable/readable to someone who is new to graphics programming and/or inexperienced in trigonometry.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Since version
0.9.6.0
, GLM broke compatibility with previous versions to use radians instead of degrees.I'd gladly make a PR to fix this in the code/articles, but I was wondering if it was more desirable to do e.g
glm::radians(45.0f)
, or simply3.1415f/4.f
, or useconst float pi = std::acos(-1);
, and dopi/4.f
?I personally think
glm::radians(45.0f)
is more understandable/readable to someone who is new to graphics programming and/or inexperienced in trigonometry.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: