Add epsilon to section distance check #2823
Open
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
|
I think this culls less than it should, because models can't be as big as a sphere enclosing a 3x3x3 box, rather they can at most be a 3x3x3 box. |
The .125 epsilon for floating point error is likely unnecessary for this comparison, unlike the frustum cull.
douira
reviewed
Oct 20, 2024
.../src/main/java/net/caffeinemc/mods/sodium/client/render/chunk/occlusion/OcclusionCuller.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
douira
approved these changes
Oct 20, 2024
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This is done to for parity with the epsilon used on frustum culling.
The epsilon is pretty pessimistic, and can be less pessimistic if the algorithm is changed slightly. I chose not to do this because it may make the function slower.I chose not to add this value to thesearchDistancevalue provided toOcclusionCuller.findVisible, because that could potentially change the sections traversed by the BFS, which I'm not sure we want.The epsilon used for this function is
1.0on each axis, enough to account for large block models, while the the frustum cull uses1.125. The extra0.125exists in the epsilon of the frustum cull due to floating point imprecision, which shouldn't come up with the minimal amount of floating point operations in the distance check.With this used, I think the
+ 0.5epsilon here may be able to be removed, also. I need confirmation on this to be sure.