On 3 September 2012 12:02, Rico Schüller wrote:
> +sinb = sqrt( 1.0f - matrix->u.m[2][2] * matrix->u.m[2][2] );
>
> I'd prefer to declare the variables as locally as possible.
>
As an aside, you'll probably want to use floating point functions like
sqrtf() instead of ones operating on doub
I had another look and like to give some suggestion.
On 02.09.2012 22:28, Nozomi Kodama wrote:
+sinb = sqrt( 1.0f - matrix->u.m[2][2] * matrix->u.m[2][2] );
I'd prefer to declare the variables as locally as possible.
+D3DXSHRotateZ(temp5, order, alpha, temp4);
+memcpy(out, temp
On 02.09.2012 23:46, Nozomi Kodama wrote:
For instance, D3DXSHAdd and D3DXSHDot accept order>D3DXSH_MAXORDER. So
we must check whether it is acceptable for other D3DXSH functions to
give such an order. If it is not acceptable, then we must know what the
function returns.
Yes, they do and I agre
For instance, D3DXSHAdd and D3DXSHDot accept order>D3DXSH_MAXORDER. So we must
check whether it is acceptable for other D3DXSH functions to give such an
order. If it is not acceptable, then we must know what the function returns.
For the out of bound problem, I agree that we reach an out of bou
On 02.09.2012 22:28, Nozomi Kodama wrote:
+for (order = 0; order < 10; order++)
Is there a reason why we'd want to test til 9? D3DXSH_MAXORDER is 6, so
7 Should be enough? I know the other test do this, but technically I see
no reason for that. Specifically the if (.. order > D3DXSH_M
