> My guess is as follows: +r90! Looking at the docs, I'd say it gets a
hic-up
> at this, probably because it needs to allocate some amount of RAM or so to
> make the storage available for that many rays. I mean, the docs say 3 is
> sufficient, and 9 already uses several thousands max, what does 90 look
> like?


Well, I tried it with more reasonable values like 9, 8, 7, 6, and the time
seemed higher with higher numbers and lower with lower ones.

Maybe it *is* an issue related to memory allocation; if so, why isn't the
memory allocated once and then reused for each pixel? Maybe there's just
some sort of O(n) initialization step going on. I wonder if it can be
optimized away.

 - Slime
 [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]

Post a reply to this message