Subj.
Details
- Reviewers
- None
- Group Reviewers
Restricted Owners Package (Owns No Changed Paths) - Commits
- rP23036: Adds projection type to CCamera to control usages of projection dependent…
- Apply the patch and compile the game
- Run the game and make sure that no assertions during a game and big screenshots work as before
- Run tests and make sure that all tests are passed as before the patch.
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rP 0 A.D. Public Repository
- Lint
Automatic diff as part of commit; lint not applicable. - Unit
Automatic diff as part of commit; unit tests not applicable.
Event Timeline
Build failure - The Moirai have given mortals hearts that can endure.
Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/docker-differential/904/display/redirect
Successful build - Chance fights ever on the side of the prudent.
Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/vs2015-differential/389/display/redirect
Not particularly a fan of ENSURE, usually it reads like TODO and it has the issue that the user can click on "continue" (thats what the average player does if he triggers one).
Better the code is written in such a way that it becomes impossible to trigger, or that it is caught and reported and runtime continues.
(Wondering if one could use a custom class or pass a functor instead of hardcoding the choices in the enum)
Otherwise no objections.
source/graphics/Camera.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
64 ↗ | (On Diff #10062) | Should m_FOV be set in the custom case too (perhaps cleared)? |
Yeah, I can call it TODO, because I want to remove it after new projection type will be added.
(Wondering if one could use a custom class or pass a functor instead of hardcoding the choices in the enum)
One could, but it seems a much more complex code. For ex, if we hides projection types, then the projection object should know about how to calculate refraction/reflection camera.
source/graphics/Camera.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
64 ↗ | (On Diff #10062) | No, it shouldn't. As we should ignore it. |