- User Since
- Mar 9 2013, 6:17 PM (403 w, 1 d)
Sat, Nov 28
Upstream for quadriflow is pretty much dead.
We could probably have these changes upstreamed, but I'm not sure if we should wait for this.
Tue, Nov 17
Thu, Nov 5
To reduce any confusion about the modifier part of things I'll explain the way we came here a bit.
Tue, Nov 3
Mon, Nov 2
I've already had to fix old comments that didn't follow our current guidelines in cleanup commits, so we already have issues like this.
I'll just throw in my two cents:
Oct 29 2020
@Daniel Salazar (zanqdo) why is this moved to known issues when we have a fix in review for it?
Oct 28 2020
Oct 27 2020
Updated with latest feedback.
Also, should we back port this?
Updated with feedback
Oct 26 2020
@Hans Goudey (HooglyBoogly) thanks for fixing this!
Oct 23 2020
Ok, this issue doesn't happen with "Undo Legacy" activated (Preferences -> Experimental -> Undo Legacy).
Oct 22 2020
Updated with latest feedback.
Oct 21 2020
Updated code to latest master and incorporated given feedback.
Oct 20 2020
The test should now pass on windows. Thanks for pointing this out!
Use ctest -VV -R libmv_vector_test if you want more verbose output on why it failed.
You have to provide more info than that.
Oct 19 2020
@Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) so how are we going to do this? Are we going to do the remove_cc_flag route?
To me it does makes sense to have the contract=off flag for GCC as it is the default with both clang and the intel compiler it seems (I don't know if it is the same with windows VS compiler)
Updated with the latest feedback.
Oct 15 2020
At least in the example file, this is the case.
I've updated the documentation to reflect the actual behavior of how rigidbodies becomes activated.
Oct 14 2020
I think it looks fine code wise still.
I thought we had the bending springs working when I helped you implement them a while back?
I agree with Sergey's comments
Oct 13 2020
This does look fine to me.
@Sybren A. Stüvel (sybren) not yet, I talked to Brecht and Sergey about it and it seems like I should probably make a bigger proposal and design about this.
Oct 6 2020
The only thing I have to add is that we should probably port this to other parts of blender that uses the same logic.
I there are a few other operators (like the decimate keyframes one) that does the same thing.
I think this looks good to me as well.
Oct 3 2020
Oct 2 2020
Perhaps we can use the remove_cc_flag macro and simply do remove_cc_flag("-ffp-contract=off") for cycles?
Oct 1 2020
I don't spot anything bad/wrong either. LGTM
Sep 30 2020
Sure, but my point is: number of re-allocations will depend on how exactly STL grows the capacity. GCC and MSVC are using different strategies, i.e. It might not be an immediate issue here, but relying on such match is like burring a dead cat into the code.
Hmm, perhaps we should just remove this test then?
If we are using the std::vector class as base, I don't think testing this is that useful?