Good to hear it as it avoids some hard decisions.
Per-pixel consistency is always the desired goal, but sometimes you have
to look at what is possible to accomplish with the APIs we depend on and
make some hard decisions. If it would take a "work around" technique
that would take 100x as long in order to get per-pixel accuracy we start
looking the other way, when it takes only 20% longer, we usually go for
it and somewhere in between is a line we've never really drawn very well.
And then there is always the possibility that a fresh approach will
discover a new way to get per-pixel accuracy without any performance
hits and so we sometimes stall on the hard question waiting for someone
to have a flash of inspiration. :-(
So, all in all, good to hear that we don't have to make a decision
here... ;-)
...jim
Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Hi again,
Are there rules that rendering has to be per-pixel consistent, with
what should I compare to see wether my implementation works correct?
Sorry about the traffic ... it seems different rounding errors were
the cause for the different results,
the rotated text was drawn to the BI at the position 0/20, whereas it
was rendered at 100/100 to screen.
With adjusted positions I get consistent rendering with rotation also.
Sorry for the traffic :-/
Thanks, Clemens
