|
Jack Digeridoo
machinimaniac
Join date: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 1,170
|
07-19-2004 11:45
RezObject works fine. We need batch rezzing and linking functions not more things to slow down RezObject.
_____________________
If you'll excuse me, it's, it's time to make the world safe for democracy.
|
|
Christopher Omega
Oxymoron
Join date: 28 Mar 2003
Posts: 1,828
|
07-19-2004 12:56
From: someone Originally posted by Jack Digeridoo
RezObject works fine. We need batch rezzing and linking functions not more things to slow down RezObject. That's where your wrong. Please read the thread in its entirety. The changes Tiger proposes do not affect what we have now in any way. llRezObject will continue to work the way it does now. Tiger is proposing two new functions: llRezObjectStatic and llGetRezString, both of which I agree with. |
|
Tiger Crossing
The Prim Maker
Join date: 18 Aug 2003
Posts: 1,560
|
07-19-2004 14:07
Yes, the old function would still work as normal. As I said in the original post, it seems to be mainly geared towards rezing bullets. For that, imprecisions in location are not that important, as the object starts out in motion. For rezing object that don't move, however, the oddities in llRezObject can cause many problems and slowdowns. So a NEW llRezStaticObject function (without the velocity param) that makes the position and rotation behavior predicatble and standardized is a must. The addition for the string parameter and a function to fetch it is icing on the cake, but it's icing that will speed up script execution since additional handlers, shouts, and listens won't be needed. The only thing I'd want more than this is tree-style nested links. 
_____________________
~ Tiger Crossing
~ (Nonsanity)
|