Remove previous bsp tree skipping optimization #5203
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Baezon
added
cleanup
Goober5000
approved these changes
Feb 18, 2023
|
Nice work. I wonder if this might help with #4089 as well. |
|
Sounds good to me as well! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Reverts #1630. The collision tree is a very useful data structure, even if it isn't being used for literal collision its the primary source of of simple vertex position and vertex count look ups. Although FotG may have been fine, it immediately caused issues in models with no_collide detail0s #1708. #1733 was a decent enough band-aid, but we really should just have the tree if we've loaded the model. With this, all models should have collision trees, the tree is how polygons are provided in the first place in the pof, so this is a guarantee.