Hello Guest

LWJGL 2.5 Released

  • 22 Replies
  • 49834 Views
*

Offline Luy

  • *
  • 9
Re: LWJGL 2.5 Released
« Reply #15 on: July 26, 2010, 21:34:33 »
I just found the following paper: http://algo2.iti.kit.edu/wassenberg/timing/timing_pitfalls.pdf
If I get it right, there is a reliable timer called High-Precision Event Timer (HPET) on current hardware and QPC uses that from Vista on.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2010, 21:53:37 by Luy »

*

Offline Matzon

  • *****
  • 2242
Re: LWJGL 2.5 Released
« Reply #16 on: July 27, 2010, 08:12:26 »
I just found the following paper: http://algo2.iti.kit.edu/wassenberg/timing/timing_pitfalls.pdf
If I get it right, there is a reliable timer called High-Precision Event Timer (HPET) on current hardware and QPC uses that from Vista on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Precision_Event_Timer:
Quote
The following operating systems are known not to be able to use HPET: Windows XP,[note 2] Windows Server 2003, and earlier Windows versions, Linux kernels prior to 2.6.[note 3]

The following operating systems are known to be able to use HPET: Windows Vista, Windows 2008, Windows 7, x86 based versions of Mac OS X, Linux operating systems using the 2.6 kernel, FreeBSD and OpenSolaris.

Before we can implement a workaround, we need a reliable way of determining if a timer is "wrong" ... ?

*

Offline Luy

  • *
  • 9
Re: LWJGL 2.5 Released
« Reply #17 on: July 27, 2010, 13:36:20 »
Before we can implement a workaround, we need a reliable way of determining if a timer is "wrong" ... ?
Sure. I'm no expert, but some googling revealed that on linux information about the used timers can be found in /sys/devices/system/clocksource/clocksource0/ or you can try to directly access the HPET as described here: http://blog.fpmurphy.com/2009/07/linux-hpet-support.html

On Windows Vista/7 a device driver is installed if HPET is available, so you could probably check that. See e.g. http://forum.scottmueller.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1284

Re: LWJGL 2.5 Released
« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2010, 15:08:37 »
In NVFramebufferMultisampleCoverage, the variable GL_MULTISAMPLE_COVERAGE_MODES_NV is spelled GL_MULITSAMPLE_COVERAGE_MODES_NV. Unless mulITsampling is a new function, it's spelled incorrectly. xd

Re: LWJGL 2.5 Released
« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2010, 17:04:05 »
ok changes made.

If you have any other remarks do point them out, always trying to make it better :)

Thanks  :)

One thing I could suggest as an improvement. It could be great if the applet loader could download and extract in parallel, instead of extracting everything at the end. This could probably speed a little more the loading (of the first run), which is always great.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2010, 17:05:52 by jouvieje »

Re: LWJGL 2.5 Released
« Reply #20 on: August 09, 2010, 18:29:04 »
Hi,
Again a great release!   :D

  • General: Added support for disabling runtime function checks, buffer checks and state tracking. Activated with -Dorg.lwjgl.util.NoChecks=true

I've dreamt of this point since a long time.

Notice: We'd like to remind people to include the copyright, conditions and disclaimer statement for LWJGL in their products, as required by the license. Though we are not about to claim foul in any way, it would be nice to see a link back to lwjgl.org in the credits or documentation at the very minimum.

Coming to my mind another idea: is there a 3D version of the LWJGL logo available somewhere?  ???

Again thanks!
WS
S.

Re: LWJGL 2.5 Released
« Reply #21 on: August 12, 2010, 10:54:26 »
Hi,
Again a great release!   :D

  • General: Added support for disabling runtime function checks, buffer checks and state tracking. Activated with -Dorg.lwjgl.util.NoChecks=true

I've dreamt of this point since a long time.

Yeah, me too. I tried disabling the checks but found it made no difference... Could you measure the performance impact of the runtime checks?
Download Cultris II, the fastest Tetris clone from http://gewaltig.net/

Re: LWJGL 2.5 Released
« Reply #22 on: August 14, 2010, 17:13:47 »
Hi,
Again a great release!   :D

  • General: Added support for disabling runtime function checks, buffer checks and state tracking. Activated with -Dorg.lwjgl.util.NoChecks=true

I've dreamt of this point since a long time.

Yeah, me too. I tried disabling the checks but found it made no difference... Could you measure the performance impact of the runtime checks?

I guess I didn't make performance tests since 3 months but at the time these checks costed around 10% of the time.
S.