Am 20.05.2018 um 18:10 schrieb William F Pokorny:

> My position is still the difference isn't large enough to be of concern,
> but if so, maybe we should more strongly consider going to >0.0 or some
> very small values for all shapes. Doing it only in blob.cpp doesn't make
> sense to me.

I guess the reason I changed it only for blobs was because there I
identified it as a problem - and I might not have been familiar enough
with the shapes stuff to know that the other shapes have a similar
mechanism.

After all, why would one expect such a mechanism if there's the "global"
MIN_ISECT_DEPTH?

Technically, I'm pretty sure the mechanism should be disabled for SSLT
rays in all shapes.


> Aside: MIN_ISECT_DEPTH doesn't exist before 3.7. Is it's creation
> related to the SSLT implementation?

No, it was already there before I joined the team. The only relation to
SSLT is that it gets in the way there.

My best guess would be that someone tried to pull the DEPTH_TOLERANCE
mechanism out of all the shapes, and stopped with the work half-finished.


BTW, one thing that has been bugging me all along about the
DEPTH_TOLERANCE and MIN_ISECT_DEPTH mechanisms (and other near-zero
tests in POV-Ray) is that they're using absolute values, rather than
adapting to the overall scale of stuff. That should be possible, right?

Post a reply to this message