meta user
network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 1 year, 7 months |
| seen | Oct 15 '12 at 18:00 | |
| stats | profile views | 12 |
|
Feb 12 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Oct 11 |
awarded | Yearling |
|
Sep 13 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Aug 29 |
awarded | Self-Learner |
|
Jul 16 |
answered | HTML5 game obfuscation |
|
Jul 13 |
awarded | Teacher |
|
Jul 13 |
answered | Huge performance difference when using drawImage with IMG vs CANVAS |
|
Jul 13 |
comment |
Huge performance difference when using drawImage with IMG vs CANVAS @hustlerinc: You mean render from a canvas onto itself? What would that prove? All the game's graphics are loaded from images, so you have to use an image at some point in the process. |
|
Jul 13 |
comment |
Huge performance difference when using drawImage with IMG vs CANVAS The trouble is that I'm relying on offscreen canvases to compose complex images. For example, I'm rendering a character's animation frames into an offscreen buffer, and then rendering things like clothing/armor/weapons on top. The game then renders from the composite canvas, rather that re-rendering all these details for each character, each frame. With canvas-to-canvas performance being so poor in non-Chrome browsers, I'd have to render the composite back into an image. It's not the end of the world, but I was hoping there is a workaround. |
|
Jul 12 |
comment |
Huge performance difference when using drawImage with IMG vs CANVAS But why is there a difference at all when in both cases they are rendering the same data? And the fact that at least one major browser has the opposite performance characteristic means we need to implement two code paths in our renderers. |
|
Jul 12 |
asked | Huge performance difference when using drawImage with IMG vs CANVAS |
|
Jun 26 |
comment |
QuadTree: store only points, or regions? Thanks, this makes sense. Sure, processing cross-node objects would be slower than objects that are completely inside a node, but I can't see any way around that. I could increase the node capacity to keep the fragmentation down, but this would increase the number of objects included in collision detection. I'll play around with that to find a good balance. |
|
Jun 22 |
asked | QuadTree: store only points, or regions? |
|
May 24 |
awarded | Supporter |
|
May 23 |
comment |
Choose tile based on adjacent tiles I am examining all surrounding tiles, but I didn't know how to handle all the tile combinations. For example, you have seven possible tiles to choose from (horizontal, vertical, four corners, and a cross). I thought of using complicated switch statements, but that felt wrong. |
|
May 23 |
awarded | Commentator |
|
May 23 |
accepted | Choose tile based on adjacent tiles |
|
May 23 |
comment |
Choose tile based on adjacent tiles Great, now my comment doesn't make sense! :p Just kidding, thanks for your answer. That's exactly what I was looking for. |
|
May 23 |
comment |
Choose tile based on adjacent tiles Never mind, I see what you're doing. You're setting bits 3 and 7, but you're counting from the left, instead of the right. |
|
May 23 |
comment |
Choose tile based on adjacent tiles Very nice! Simple and efficient. The only thing that I don't understand is how you're getting those bitmasks. For example how are you getting a bitmask of 17 from the numbers 3 and 7? |
