On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 23:52 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 07:02:50PM +0100, Eduardo Lima Mitev wrote:
> > From: Iago Toral Quiroga
> >
> > We can't use sampler messages with gradient information (like
> > sample_g or sample_d) to deal with this scenario because according
>
On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 23:52 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 07:02:50PM +0100, Eduardo Lima Mitev wrote:
> > From: Iago Toral Quiroga
> >
> > We can't use sampler messages with gradient information (like
> > sample_g or sample_d) to deal with this scenario because according
>
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 07:02:50PM +0100, Eduardo Lima Mitev wrote:
> From: Iago Toral Quiroga
>
> We can't use sampler messages with gradient information (like
> sample_g or sample_d) to deal with this scenario because according
> to the PRM:
>
> "The r coordinate and its gradients are required
Am 05.05.2015 um 00:16 schrieb Matt Turner:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Roland Scheidegger
> wrote:
>> As a side note (not really directly related to the patch) I think this
>> could benefit from some optimization, unless there's some passes
>> somewhere which can already do this.
>>
>> T
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> As a side note (not really directly related to the patch) I think this
> could benefit from some optimization, unless there's some passes
> somewhere which can already do this.
>
> The non-scalar (non-cube) calculation does this:
> lod_
As a side note (not really directly related to the patch) I think this
could benefit from some optimization, unless there's some passes
somewhere which can already do this.
The non-scalar (non-cube) calculation does this:
lod_info.lod = log2(max(sqrt(dot1), sqrt(dot2)))
The second sqrt can be triv
