On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, IOhannes zmoelnig wrote:
? wrote:
Actually, why are there two texture objects, is there a reason why this can't be done in one object ?
well [pix_texture] does simply load a pixbuffer into texture-ram. it does know nothing about texture-coordinates. (these are handled by [pix_coordinates])
[pix_texture2] does load an image into texture-ram as a sub-texture (of a black master-texture) with coordinates set so it appear as a "normal" (full) texture. thus it enables you to use images that are not power-of-2 as textures without expensive rescaling it is copy'n'pasted from pix_movie.
it might not be that elegant (as would be [pix_subtexture]+[pix_coordinates]) but i think it is easier for handling, since you do not need to know the size of the img.
Yes, thats really nice and important, because noone has power of two movies, but it doesn't answer my question.
I am asking if this fact could not be hidden from the user.
I am thinking about a pix_texture that detects the image size and behaves accordingly. Pix_texture2 does that, so why not throw away pix_texture and use pix_texture2 ?
Guenter