20,741
edits
FG1000: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Performance
(→C++) |
|||
| Line 106: | Line 106: | ||
== Challenges == | == Challenges == | ||
=== Performance === | === Performance === | ||
{{See also|Canvas_Development#Property_I.2FO_observations}} | {{See also|Canvas_Development#Property_I.2FO_observations|Canvas_MapStructure#Performance}} | ||
Nasal as such is fast, and compared with the cost of rendering the terrain, rendering a canvas display is fast on the GPU (you can test by rendering but not updating a canvas display), and unless you're doing something very inefficient, calculating a display but not writing it to the property tree is fast (you can test this by disabling the write commands). It's the property I/O which you need to structure well, and then canvas will run fast. And of course the complexity of your underlying simulation costs - if you run a thermal model underneath to get real temperature reading, it costs more than inventing the numbers. But that has nothing to do with canvas. <ref>{{cite web | Nasal as such is fast, and compared with the cost of rendering the terrain, rendering a canvas display is fast on the GPU (you can test by rendering but not updating a canvas display), and unless you're doing something very inefficient, calculating a display but not writing it to the property tree is fast (you can test this by disabling the write commands). It's the property I/O which you need to structure well, and then canvas will run fast. And of course the complexity of your underlying simulation costs - if you run a thermal model underneath to get real temperature reading, it costs more than inventing the numbers. But that has nothing to do with canvas. <ref>{{cite web | ||
|url = https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/mailman/message/35926343/ | |url = https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/mailman/message/35926343/ | ||