The grid calculations are modified from those of Inigo Quilez
(https://iquilezles.org/articles/filterableprocedurals/), but give very
nice results: when thin enough, the lines fade out nicely instead of
producing crazy moire patterns. Though currently disabled, the default
planes are the xy, yz and zx planes with colored axes.
Based on the article
(https://developer.nvidia.com/content/depth-precision-visualized), this
should give nice precision behavior, and removes the need to worry about
large maps getting clipped. If I'm doing my math correctly, despite
being reversed, near precision is still crazy high. And (thanks to the
reversed depth) about a quarter of a unit (for near clip of 4) out at 1M
unit distance.
This seems to be more for legacy X11 (ie, without fixes etc), but
fullscreen really shouldn't affect grabbing directly (rather, it should
be up to the client whether grabbing (and thus warping) is enabled at
all.
con_linewidt starts out as 0, which leads to bad results for the initial
widths of input lines and later calculations. However, really, they
probably shouldn't be using size_t for the width, but this is a nice
quick fix.
Due to doing most of my testing using the demos, I hadn't noticed the
double-draw until flying around with the debug camera (and it showed as
a weird shimmer behind the sky layers).
Panels can be anchored to a widget in another hierarchy, allowing for
things like cascading menus. They can also be extended via referencing
them by name, allowing for subsystems to add items to an already panel
(eg, extending a menu).
This prevent the layout system from repositioning the text view and thus
breaking text-shaping. Now Tengwar Telcontar looks much more balanced in
the widgets.
The lights debug is from the light splat experiment (this is why I kept
the code), and the bsp debug is based on that. Both currently disabled
for now until I get UI controls in.
SCR_UpdateScreen_Legacy now takes only the screen functions pointer (it
didn't need camera or realtime), and the camera sizzle code has been
moved into one place to make cleaning it up easier (when I get around to
auditing AngleVectors etc).
Skipping the root view (widget) sort of made sense before windows became
separate canvases as there was only the one hierarchy, but doing so
prevented windows (panels) from fitting themselves to their children.
However, now I need to think of a good way of specifying a minimum size
for panels.
WIdgets can't possibly be active when the entire UI is hidden, and
resetting the active widget when hiding the UI helps when the state gets
broken due to widget id conflicts.
The intent is to use them for menus, tooltips and anything else along
those lines, but windows was a good starting point (and puts a border
along the top of the window too).
It's not perfect as the first N expanding children get grown by 1 pixel
regarless of weight, but it's much better than leaving a (possibly quite
large) gap at the edge of the layout.
I'm not sure this is what I want, especially in the long run, but it
does make simple windows much easier to create (and not look broken due
to being specified too small).
Canvas draw order is sorted by group then order within the group. As a
fallback, the canvas entity id is used to keep the sort stable, but
that's only as stable as the ids themselves (if the canvases are
destroyed and recreated, the ids may switch around).
This has use when the order of components in the pool affects draw order
(or has other significance), especially at the subpool level. I plan to
use it for fixing overlapping windows in imui.
Shaped text is cached using all the shaping parameters as well as the
text itself as a key. This makes text shaping a non-issue for imui when
the text is stable, taking my simple test from 120fps to 1000fps
(optimized build).
As I had long suspected, building large hierarchies is fiendishly
expensive (at least O(N^2)). However, this is because the hierarchies
are structured such that adding high-level nodes results in a lot of
copying due to the flattened (breadth-first) layout (which does make for
excellent breadth-first performance when working with a hierarchy).
Using tree mode allows adding new nodes to be O(1) (I guess O(N) for the
size of the sub-tree being added, but that's not supported yet) and
costs only an additional 8 bytes per node. Switching from flat mode to
tree mode is very cheap as only the additional tree-related indices need
to be fixed up (they're almost entirely ignored in flat mode). Switching
from tree to flat mode is a little more expensive as the entire tree
needs to be copied, but it seems to be an O(N) (size of the tree).
With this, building the style editor window went from about 25% to about
5% (and most of that is realloc!), with a 1.3% cost for switching from
tree mode to flat mode.
There's still a lot of work to do (supporting removal and tree inserts).
