Search Results

Search found 3508 results on 141 pages for 'face detection'.

Page 11/141 | < Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >

  • Sony officialise son contrôleur à détection de mouvements, le PlayStation Move, lors de la Game Deve

    Sony officialise son contrôleur à détection de mouvements, le PlayStation Move, lors de la GDC 2010 C'est au cours de la Game Developers Conference 2010 (GDC 2010) que Sony a révélé et officialisé son nouveau contrôleur à détection de mouvements pour sa console de jeux PlayStation3. Les rumeurs le nommaient Gem ou Arc mais ce nouveau produit portera la dénomination de PlayStation Move. Sony a également dévoilé que le PlayStation Move serait accompagné d'un périphérique sans fils annexe nommé simplement Sub Controller qui n'est pas sans rappeler le Nunchuk de la console Nintendo Wii. Accompagné du PlayStation Eye (la webcam de la PlayStation 3), ce nouveau contrôleur sera vendu en pack avec un je...

    Read the article

  • is it legal to use fontsquirrel.com to create a @font-face kit for a font I have been given?

    - by ongoingworlds
    fontsquirrel.com allows you to upload a font and create a @font-face kit which you can apply to your website and use to display fonts which will display cross-browser (even in IE6!). But what I want to know is, is this legal? I've been supplied the font "Lubalin Graph Std" and told to use this for headers on the website I'm creating. I can upload the font file to fontsquirrel.com and use this to display headers in this font across the website - but I'm worried we'll get into trouble for doing this. What should I do?

    Read the article

  • Getting started with object detection - Image segmentation algorithm

    - by Dev Kanchen
    Just getting started on a hobby object-detection project. My aim is to understand the underlying algorithms and to this end the overall accuracy of the results is (currently) more important than actual run-time. I'm starting with trying to find a good image segmentation algorithm that provide a good jump-off point for the object detection phase. The target images would be "real-world" scenes. I found two techniques which mirrored my thoughts on how to go about this: Graph-based Image Segmentation: http://www.cs.cornell.edu/~dph/papers/seg-ijcv.pdf Contour and Texture Analysis for Image Segmentation: http://www.eng.utah.edu/~bresee/compvision/files/MalikBLS.pdf The first one was really intuitive to understand and seems simple enough to implement, while the second was closer to my initial thoughts on how to go about this (combine color/intensity and texture information to find regions). But it's an order of magnitude more complex (at least for me). My question is - are there any other algorithms I should be looking at that provide the kind of results that these two, specific papers have arrived at. Are there updated versions of these techniques already floating around. Like I mentioned earlier, the goal is relative accuracy of image segmentation (with an eventual aim to achieve a degree of accuracy of object detection) over runtime, with the algorithm being able to segment an image into "naturally" or perceptually important components, as these two algorithms do (each to varying extents). Thanks! P.S.1: I found these two papers after a couple of days of refining my search terms and learning new ones relevant to the exact kind of techniques I was looking for. :) I have just about reached the end of my personal Google creativity, which is why I am finally here! Thanks for the help. P.S.2: I couldn't find good tags for this question. If some relevant ones exist, @mods please add them. P.S.3: I do not know if this is a better fit for cstheory.stackexchange (or even cs.stackexchange). I looked but cstheory seems more appropriate for intricate algorithmic discussions than a broad question like this. Also, I couldn't find any relevant tags there either! But please do move if appropriate.

    Read the article

  • Getting collision detection in Pygames

    - by user36010
    I am writing a game in Pygame, I want to get collision detection. The aim is when a object hits another, the target object disappears. I want to avoid having classes and just have my code class less for now, in one script. This makes it difficult to get collision detection because the Rect method in Pygame is called on by an object(class). The logic I want to achieve is: object hits a target object target object disappears. is there an easy way to achieve this?(with minimal code possible)

    Read the article

  • How do i programmatically access the face cache in Windows Live Photo Gallery?

    - by acorderob
    I'm not talking about the "people tags" embeded in the XMP packets of JPEGs. I'm talking about the face database used to recognize new faces. I want to add to my program the option to recognize faces using the already trained database of WLPG. I managed to use the API (a type library dll) to detect faces, but to recognize them it needs an Exemplar Cache object that is not available in the same API. I could create my own object, but i want to use the already existing one to avoid duplicate training for the user. I know the database is in C:\Users\\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows Live Photo Gallery and that it is in an SQL Server Compact format. I tried to open the database with Visual Studio 2010, but it says that it is in an older version (pre-3.5) and needs to be upgraded. I don't want to change the database, just read it. I don't know how the WPLG reads it since apparently i don't have the correct OLEDB provider version. I would also prefer to read it without accesing the database directly but i don't see any DLL that exports that functionality. BTW, i'm using Delphi 2010. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • How can I get penetration depth from Minkowski Portal Refinement / Xenocollide?

    - by Raven Dreamer
    I recently got an implementation of Minkowski Portal Refinement (MPR) successfully detecting collision. Even better, my implementation returns a good estimate (local minimum) direction for the minimum penetration depth. So I took a stab at adjusting the algorithm to return the penetration depth in an arbitrary direction, and was modestly successful - my altered method works splendidly for face-edge collision resolution! What it doesn't currently do, is correctly provide the minimum penetration depth for edge-edge scenarios, such as the case on the right: What I perceive to be happening, is that my current method returns the minimum penetration depth to the nearest vertex - which works fine when the collision is actually occurring on the plane of that vertex, but not when the collision happens along an edge. Is there a way I can alter my method to return the penetration depth to the point of collision, rather than the nearest vertex? Here's the method that's supposed to return the minimum penetration distance along a specific direction: public static Vector3 CalcMinDistance(List<Vector3> shape1, List<Vector3> shape2, Vector3 dir) { //holding variables Vector3 n = Vector3.zero; Vector3 swap = Vector3.zero; // v0 = center of Minkowski sum v0 = Vector3.zero; // Avoid case where centers overlap -- any direction is fine in this case //if (v0 == Vector3.zero) return Vector3.zero; //always pass in a valid direction. // v1 = support in direction of origin n = -dir; //get the differnce of the minkowski sum Vector3 v11 = GetSupport(shape1, -n); Vector3 v12 = GetSupport(shape2, n); v1 = v12 - v11; //if the support point is not in the direction of the origin if (v1.Dot(n) <= 0) { //Debug.Log("Could find no points this direction"); return Vector3.zero; } // v2 - support perpendicular to v1,v0 n = v1.Cross(v0); if (n == Vector3.zero) { //v1 and v0 are parallel, which means //the direction leads directly to an endpoint n = v1 - v0; //shortest distance is just n //Debug.Log("2 point return"); return n; } //get the new support point Vector3 v21 = GetSupport(shape1, -n); Vector3 v22 = GetSupport(shape2, n); v2 = v22 - v21; if (v2.Dot(n) <= 0) { //can't reach the origin in this direction, ergo, no collision //Debug.Log("Could not reach edge?"); return Vector2.zero; } // Determine whether origin is on + or - side of plane (v1,v0,v2) //tests linesegments v0v1 and v0v2 n = (v1 - v0).Cross(v2 - v0); float dist = n.Dot(v0); // If the origin is on the - side of the plane, reverse the direction of the plane if (dist > 0) { //swap the winding order of v1 and v2 swap = v1; v1 = v2; v2 = swap; //swap the winding order of v11 and v12 swap = v12; v12 = v11; v11 = swap; //swap the winding order of v11 and v12 swap = v22; v22 = v21; v21 = swap; //and swap the plane normal n = -n; } /// // Phase One: Identify a portal while (true) { // Obtain the support point in a direction perpendicular to the existing plane // Note: This point is guaranteed to lie off the plane Vector3 v31 = GetSupport(shape1, -n); Vector3 v32 = GetSupport(shape2, n); v3 = v32 - v31; if (v3.Dot(n) <= 0) { //can't enclose the origin within our tetrahedron //Debug.Log("Could not reach edge after portal?"); return Vector3.zero; } // If origin is outside (v1,v0,v3), then eliminate v2 and loop if (v1.Cross(v3).Dot(v0) < 0) { //failed to enclose the origin, adjust points; v2 = v3; v21 = v31; v22 = v32; n = (v1 - v0).Cross(v3 - v0); continue; } // If origin is outside (v3,v0,v2), then eliminate v1 and loop if (v3.Cross(v2).Dot(v0) < 0) { //failed to enclose the origin, adjust points; v1 = v3; v11 = v31; v12 = v32; n = (v3 - v0).Cross(v2 - v0); continue; } bool hit = false; /// // Phase Two: Refine the portal int phase2 = 0; // We are now inside of a wedge... while (phase2 < 20) { phase2++; // Compute normal of the wedge face n = (v2 - v1).Cross(v3 - v1); n.Normalize(); // Compute distance from origin to wedge face float d = n.Dot(v1); // If the origin is inside the wedge, we have a hit if (d > 0 ) { //Debug.Log("Do plane test here"); float T = n.Dot(v2) / n.Dot(dir); Vector3 pointInPlane = (dir * T); return pointInPlane; } // Find the support point in the direction of the wedge face Vector3 v41 = GetSupport(shape1, -n); Vector3 v42 = GetSupport(shape2, n); v4 = v42 - v41; float delta = (v4 - v3).Dot(n); float separation = -(v4.Dot(n)); if (delta <= kCollideEpsilon || separation >= 0) { //Debug.Log("Non-convergance detected"); //Debug.Log("Do plane test here"); return Vector3.zero; } // Compute the tetrahedron dividing face (v4,v0,v1) float d1 = v4.Cross(v1).Dot(v0); // Compute the tetrahedron dividing face (v4,v0,v2) float d2 = v4.Cross(v2).Dot(v0); // Compute the tetrahedron dividing face (v4,v0,v3) float d3 = v4.Cross(v3).Dot(v0); if (d1 < 0) { if (d2 < 0) { // Inside d1 & inside d2 ==> eliminate v1 v1 = v4; v11 = v41; v12 = v42; } else { // Inside d1 & outside d2 ==> eliminate v3 v3 = v4; v31 = v41; v32 = v42; } } else { if (d3 < 0) { // Outside d1 & inside d3 ==> eliminate v2 v2 = v4; v21 = v41; v22 = v42; } else { // Outside d1 & outside d3 ==> eliminate v1 v1 = v4; v11 = v41; v12 = v42; } } } return Vector3.zero; } }

    Read the article

  • The New Face of Autism Therapy

    <b>Popsci:</b> "With one in 110 children diagnosed with autism, and therapists in short supply, researchers are developing humanoids to fill the gaps. But can robots help patients forge stronger bonds with people? "

    Read the article

  • Rotate sprite to face 3D camera

    - by omikun
    I am trying to rotate a sprite so it is always facing a 3D camera. shaders->setUniform("camera", gCamera.matrix()); glm::mat4 scale = glm::scale(glm::mat4(), glm::vec3(5e5, 5e5, 5e5)); glm::vec3 look = gCamera.position(); glm::vec3 right = glm::cross(gCamera.up(), look); glm::vec3 up = glm::cross(look, right); glm::mat4 newTransform = glm::lookAt(glm::vec3(0), gCamera.position(), up) * scale; shaders->setUniform("model", newTransform); In the vertex shader: gl_Position = camera * model * vec4(vert, 1); The object will track the camera if I move the camera up or down, but if I rotate the camera around it, it will rotate in the other direction so I end up seeing its front twice and its back twice as I rotate around it 360. What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • The Changing Face of PASS

    - by Bill Graziano
    I’m starting my sixth year on the PASS Board.  I served two years as the Program Director, two years as the Vice-President of Marketing and I’m starting my second year as the Executive Vice-President of Finance.  There’s a pretty good chance that if PASS has done something you don’t like or is doing something you don’t like, that I’m involved in one way or another. Andy Leonard asked in a comment on his blog if the Board had ever reversed itself based on community input.  He asserted that it hadn’t.  I disagree.  I’m not going to try and list all the changes we make inside portfolios based on feedback from and meetings with the community.  I’m going to focus on major governance issues since I was elected to the Board. Management Company The first big change was our management company.  Our old management company had a standard approach to running a non-profit.  It worked well when PASS was launched.  Having a ready-made structure and process to run the organization enabled the organization to grow quickly.  As time went on we were limited in some of the things we wanted to do.  The more involved you were with PASS, the more you saw these limitations.  Key volunteers were regularly providing feedback that they wanted certain changes that were difficult for us to accomplish.  The Board at that time wanted changes that were difficult or impossible to accomplish under that structure. This was not a simple change.  Imagine a $2.5 million dollar company letting all its employees go on a Friday and starting with a new staff on Monday.  We also had a very narrow window to accomplish that so that we wouldn’t affect the Summit – our only source of revenue.  We spent the year after the change rebuilding processes and putting on the Summit in Denver.  That’s a concrete example of a huge change that PASS made to better serve its members.  And it was a change that many in the community were telling us we needed to make. Financials We heard regularly from our members that they wanted our financials posted.  Today on our web site you can find audited financials going back to 2004.  We publish our budget at the start of each year.  If you ask a question about the financials on the PASS site I do my best to answer it.  I’m also trying to do a better job answering financial questions posted in other locations.  (And yes, I know I owe a few of you some blog posts.) That’s another concrete example of a change that our members asked for that the Board agreed was a good decision. Minutes When I started on the Board the meeting minutes were very limited.  The minutes from a two day Board meeting might fit on one page.  I think we did the bare minimum we were legally required to do.  Today Board meeting minutes run from 5 to 12 pages and go into incredible detail on what we talk about.  There are certain topics that are NDA but where possible we try to list the topic we discussed but that the actual discussion was under NDA.  We also publish the agenda of Board meetings ahead of time. This is another specific example where input from the community influenced the decision.  It was certainly easier to have limited minutes but I think the extra effort helps our members understand what’s going on. Board Q&A At the 2009 Summit the Board held its first public Q&A with our members.  We’d always been available individually to answer questions.  There’s a benefit to getting us all in one room and asking the really hard questions to watch us squirm.  We learn what questions we don’t have good answers for.  We get to see how many people in the crowd look interested in the various questions and answers. I don’t recall the genesis of how this came about.  I’m fairly certain there was some community pressure though. Board Votes Until last November, the Board only reported the vote totals and not how individual Board members voted.  That was one of the topics at a great lunch I had with Tim Mitchell and Kendal van Dyke at the Summit.  That was also the topic of the first question asked at the Board Q&A by Kendal.  Kendal expressed his opposition to to anonymous votes clearly and passionately and without trying to paint anyone into a corner.  Less than 24 hours later the PASS Board voted to make individual votes public unless the topic was under NDA.  That’s another area where the Board decided to change based on feedback from our members. Summit Location While this isn’t actually a governance issue it is one of the more public decisions we make that has taken some public criticism.  There is a significant portion of our members that want the Summit near them.  There is a significant portion of our members that like the Summit in Seattle.  There is a significant portion of our members that think it should move around the country.  I was one that felt strongly that there were significant, tangible benefits to our attendees to being in Seattle every year.  I’m also one that has been swayed by some very compelling arguments that we need to have at least one outside Seattle and then revisit the decision.  I can’t tell you how the Board will vote but I know the opinion of our members weighs heavily on the decision. Elections And that brings us to the grand-daddy of all governance issues.  My thesis for this blog post is that the PASS Board has implemented policy changes in response to member feedback.  It isn’t to defend or criticize our election process.  It’s just to say that is has been under going continuous change since I’ve been on the Board.  I ran for the Board in the fall of 2005.  I don’t know much about what happened before then.  I was actively volunteering for PASS for four years prior to that as a chapter leader and on the program committee.  I don’t recall any complaints about elections but that doesn’t mean they didn’t occur.  The questions from the Nominating Committee (NomCom) were trivial and the selection process rudimentary (For example, “Tell us about your accomplishments”).  I don’t even remember who I ran against or how many other people ran.  I ran for the VP of Marketing in the fall of 2007.  I don’t recall any significant changes the Board made in the election process for that election.  I think a lot of the changes in 2007 came from us asking the management company to work on the election process.  I was expecting a similar set of puff ball questions from my previous election.  Boy, was I in for a shock.  The NomCom had found a much better set of questions and really made the interview portion difficult.  The questions were much more behavioral in nature.  I’d already written about my vision for PASS and my goals.  They wanted to know how I handled adversity, how I handled criticism, how I handled conflict, how I handled troublesome volunteers, how I motivated people and how I responded to motivation. And many, many other things. They grilled me for over an hour.  I’ve done a fair bit of technical sales in my time.  I feel I speak well under pressure addressing pointed questions.  This interview intentionally put me under pressure.  In addition to wanting to know about my interpersonal skills, my work experience, my volunteer experience and my supervisory experience they wanted to see how I’d do under pressure.  They wanted to see who would respond under pressure and who wouldn’t.  It was a bit of a shock. That was the first big change I remember in the election process.  I know there were other improvements around the process but none of them stick in my mind quite like the unexpected hour-long grilling. The next big change I remember was after the 2009 elections.  Andy Warren was unhappy with the election process and wanted to make some changes.  He worked with Hannes at HQ and they came up with a better set of processes.  I think Andy moved PASS in the right direction.  Nonetheless, after the 2010 election even more people were very publicly clamoring for changes to our election process.  In August of 2010 we had a choice to make.  There were numerous bloggers criticizing the Board and our upcoming election.  The easy change would be to announce that we were changing the process in a way that would satisfy our critics.  I believe that a knee-jerk response to criticism is seldom correct. Instead the Board spent August and September and October and November listening to the community.  I visited two SQLSaturdays and asked questions of everyone I could.  I attended chapter meetings and asked questions of as many people as they’d let me.  At Summit I made it a point to introduce myself to strangers and ask them about the election.  At every breakfast I’d sit down at a table full of strangers and ask about the election.  I’m happy to say that I left most tables arguing about the election.  Most days I managed to get 2 or 3 breakfasts in. I spent less time talking to people that had already written about the election.  They were already expressing their opinion.  I wanted to talk to people that hadn’t spoken up.  I wanted to know what the silent majority thought.  The Board all attended the Q&A session where our members expressed their concerns about a variety of issues including the election. The PASS Board also chose to create the Election Review Committee.  We wanted people from the community that had been involved with PASS to look at our election process with fresh eyes while listening to what the community had to say and give us some advice on how we could improve the process.  I’m a part of this as is Andy Warren.  None of the other members are on the Board.  I’ve sat in numerous calls and interviews with this group and attended an open meeting at the Summit.  We asked anyone that wanted to discuss the election to come speak with us.  The ERC held an open meeting at the Summit and invited anyone to attend.  There are forums on the ERC web site where we’ve invited people to participate.  The ERC has reached to key people involved in recent elections.  The years that I haven’t mentioned also saw minor improvements in the election process.  Off the top of my head I don’t recall what exact changes were made each year.  Specifically since the 2010 election we’ve gone out of our way to seek input from the community about the process.  I’m not sure what more we could have done to invite feedback from the community. I think to say that we haven’t “fixed” the election process isn’t a fair criticism at this time.  We haven’t rushed any changes through the process.  If you don’t see any changes in our election process in July or August then I think it’s fair to criticize us for ignoring the community or ask for an explanation for what we’ve done. In Summary Andy’s main point was that the PASS Board hasn’t changed in response to our members wishes.  I think I’ve shown that time and time again the PASS Board has changed in response to what our members want.  There are only two outstanding issues: Summit location and elections.  The 2013 Summit location hasn’t been decided yet.  Our work on the elections is also in progress.  And at every step in the election review we’ve gone out of our way to listen to the community and incorporate their feedback on the process. I also hope I’m not encouraging everyone that wants some change in the organization to organize a “blog rush” against the Board.  We take public suggestions very seriously but we also take the time to evaluate those suggestions and learn what the rest of our members think and make a measured decision.

    Read the article

  • PowerShell, Start-Job, -ScriptBlock = sad panda face

    - by AaronBertrand
    I am working on a project where I am using PowerShell to collect a lot of performance counters from a lot of servers. More on that later. For now I wanted to highlight an important lesson I learned when trying to use Start-Job to call a PS script using -ScriptBlock and passing in parameters. This could be a comedy of errors if you haven't come across it before, so I thought it might be useful to throw up a quick post about it. To keep things simple, let's say I am calling a script with two parameters,...(read more)

    Read the article

  • What's wrong with this turn to face algorithm?

    - by Chan
    I implement a torpedo object that chases a rotating planet. Specifically, it will turn toward the planet each update. Initially my implement was: void move() { vector3<float> to_target = target - get_position(); to_target.normalize(); position += (to_target * speed); } which works perfectly for torpedo that is a solid sphere. Now my torpedo is actually a model, which has a forward vector, so using this method looks odd because it doesn't actually turn toward but jump toward. So I revised it a bit to get, double get_rotation_angle(vector3<float> u, vector3<float> v) const { u.normalize(); v.normalize(); double cosine_theta = u.dot(v); // domain of arccosine is [-1, 1] if (cosine_theta > 1) { cosine_theta = 1; } if (cosine_theta < -1) { cosine_theta = -1; } return math3d::to_degree(acos(cosine_theta)); } vector3<float> get_rotation_axis(vector3<float> u, vector3<float> v) const { u.normalize(); v.normalize(); // fix linear case if (u == v || u == -v) { v[0] += 0.05; v[1] += 0.0; v[2] += 0.05; v.normalize(); } vector3<float> axis = u.cross(v); return axis.normal(); } void turn_to_face() { vector3<float> to_target = (target - position); vector3<float> axis = get_rotation_axis(get_forward(), to_target); double angle = get_rotation_angle(get_forward(), to_target); double distance = math3d::distance(position, target); gl_matrix_mode(GL_MODELVIEW); gl_push_matrix(); { gl_load_identity(); gl_translate_f(position.get_x(), position.get_y(), position.get_z()); gl_rotate_f(angle, axis.get_x(), axis.get_y(), axis.get_z()); gl_get_float_v(GL_MODELVIEW_MATRIX, OM); } gl_pop_matrix(); move(); } void move() { vector3<float> to_target = target - get_position(); to_target.normalize(); position += (get_forward() * speed); } The logic is simple, I find the rotation axis by cross product, the angle to rotate by dot product, then turn toward the target position each update. Unfortunately, it looks extremely odds since the rotation happens too fast that it always turns back and forth. The forward vector for torpedo is from the ModelView matrix, the third column A: MODELVIEW MATRIX -------------------------------------------------- R U A T -------------------------------------------------- 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 -------------------------------------------------- Any suggestion or idea would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • HP's Linux OS Alternative Gets a Face Lift

    <b>ServerWatch:</b> "In contrast, IBM and HP, the other two big enterprise UNIX players, have been plodding along steadily, hoping all the while to pick up disaffected Sun customers quicker than they lose their own to Linux implementations."

    Read the article

  • HP's Linux OS Alternative Gets a Face Lift

    OS Roundup: Despite the growing popularity of the myriad Linux OS and cloud computing options, HP-UX retains a strong, albeit leaking, presence. Now, with Sun's UNIX ecosystem in turmoil, HP is seizing the day as it packages and sings the virtues of its Big Iron OS.

    Read the article

  • HP's Linux OS Alternative Gets a Face Lift

    OS Roundup: Despite the growing popularity of the myriad Linux OS and cloud computing options, HP-UX retains a strong, albeit leaking, presence. Now, with Sun's UNIX ecosystem in turmoil, HP is seizing the day as it packages and sings the virtues of its Big Iron OS.

    Read the article

  • Tales from the Coal Face - Speeding up a C# compilation

    - by TATWORTH
    At one place, I was faced with a C# solution which when XML documentation was turned on, the compilation time increased from 45 seconds to over 8 minutes. This slowdown was unacceptable, however some digging revealed an excellent suggestion by Eric Woodruff at http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/devdocs/thread/9bbad4cc-e229-49da-a6f7-3cdf470ac53a/ where he suggested "just suppress the warning by entering it's number (1591 for C#) in the Suppress Warnings field on the Build tab of the project properties". I followed Eric's suggestion and the compilation time went back down to 45 seconds. Now that CS1591 is suppressed how was missing documentation to be found? All that was necessary was to run StyleCop!

    Read the article

  • From the Coal Face - StyleCop 4.4.0

    - by TATWORTH
    Style Cop 4.4.0 is now out. This is a free download from http://stylecop.codeplex.com/ (please note the new location). This version is for VS2010. If you are usign an older version of Visual Studio you be prepared to keep to an older release like 4.3.0. The more I use StyleCop the more I like it. Code that is style cop compliant is much easier to pick up. It helps if you have GhostDoc (free) and Resharper (from jetBrains.Com)

    Read the article

  • Is there a simple way to stop enemies standing in the same spot?

    - by Iain
    So: top-down game, my enemies chase the player, when they get within a certain distance they stand still and fire. If they're all coming from the same direction they all end up standing in the same spot (i.e. standing "within" each other), as I'm not currently doing collision detection between enemies - they are free to pass over each other. What's a simple way around this? Either some form of collision detection or some ai?

    Read the article

  • std::vector::size with glDrawElements crashes?

    - by NoobScratcher
    ( win32 / OpenGL 3.3 / GLSL 330 ) I decided after a long time of trying to do a graphical user interface using just opengl graphics to go back to a gui toolkit and so in the process have had to port alot of my code to win32. But I have a problem with my glDrawElement function. my program compiles and runs fine until it gets to glDrawElements then crashes.. which is rather annoying right. so I was trying to figure out why and I found out its std::vector::size member not returning the correct amount of faces in the unsigned interger vector eg, "vector<unsigned int>faces; " so when I use cout << faces.size() << endl; I got 68 elements???? instead of 24 as you can see here in this .obj file: # Blender v2.61 (sub 0) OBJ File: '' # www.blender.org v 1.000000 -1.000000 -1.000000 v 1.000000 -1.000000 1.000000 v -1.000000 -1.000000 1.000000 v -1.000000 -1.000000 -1.000000 v 1.000000 1.000000 -0.999999 v 0.999999 1.000000 1.000001 v -1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 v -1.000000 1.000000 -1.000000 s off f 1 2 3 4 f 5 8 7 6 f 1 5 6 2 f 2 6 7 3 <--- 24 Faces not 68? f 3 7 8 4 f 5 1 4 8 I'm using a parser I created to get the faces/vertexes in my .obj file: char modelbuffer [20000]; int MAX_BUFF = 20000; unsigned int face[3]; FILE * pfile; pfile = fopen(szFileName, "rw"); while(fgets(modelbuffer, MAX_BUFF, pfile) != NULL) { if('v') { Point p; sscanf(modelbuffer, "v %f %f %f", &p.x, &p.y, &p.z); points.push_back(p); cout << " p.x = " << p.x << " p.y = " << p.y << " p.z = " << p.x << endl; } if('f') { sscanf(modelbuffer, "f %d %d %d %d", &face[0], &face[1], &face[2], &face[3]); cout << "face[0] = " << face[0] << " face[1] = " << face[1] << " face[2] = " << face[2] << " face[3] = " << face[3] << "\n"; faces.push_back(face[0] - 1); faces.push_back(face[1] - 1); faces.push_back(face[2] - 1); faces.push_back(face[3] - 1); cout << face[0] - 1 << face[1] - 1 << face[2] - 1 << face[3] - 1 << endl; } } using this struct to store the x,y,z positions also this vector was used with Point: vector<Point>points; struct Point { float x, y, z; }; If someone could tell me why its not working and how to fix it that would be awesome I also provide a pastebin to the full source code if you want a closer look. http://pastebin.com/gznYLVw7

    Read the article

  • The New Face of SEO - It Has Taken on a New Role

    As little as just a few years ago, SEO referred to the service of making sure your website code was up to standard and that all of the necessary page elements were in place so your website could effectively communicate with the search engines. Back then, a Search Engine Optimisation consultant optimised your site and submitted it to the search engines and you were off to the races.

    Read the article

  • Tales from the Coal Face - Reporting errors

    - by TATWORTH
    One of the questions that comes up frequently, is "Is it worthwhile to report errors?".Last weekend, after installing the latest StyleCop I loaded up my copy of Power Collections. I found that StyleCop was now correctly picking up a lot of missing "this." statements, however there were now a number of false positives. Anticipating the need to submit sample code, I cleaned the solution and zipped it up.I reported this at http://stylecop.codeplex.com/discussions/357319.  The stylecop administrator promoted this report to a work item (see http://stylecop.codeplex.com/workitem/7285) and I uploaded the previously prepared Zip file. The StyleCop team was able to locate the problem and it is "Fixed in upcoming 4.7.27".The conclusion:Report errors!  Prepare sample code illustrating the error.

    Read the article

  • 3 Problems Some Large Websites Face With SEO

    Thin content, duplicate content, or little or no original content can be killers to your large website SEO strategy. Using great keywords appropriately can really help indicate the subject matter of the individual page and allow for better SEO indexing. Here are a few tips to help optimize your large website and avoid thin content pages.

    Read the article

  • Optimizing collision engine bottleneck

    - by Vittorio Romeo
    Foreword: I'm aware that optimizing this bottleneck is not a necessity - the engine is already very fast. I, however, for fun and educational purposes, would love to find a way to make the engine even faster. I'm creating a general-purpose C++ 2D collision detection/response engine, with an emphasis on flexibility and speed. Here's a very basic diagram of its architecture: Basically, the main class is World, which owns (manages memory) of a ResolverBase*, a SpatialBase* and a vector<Body*>. SpatialBase is a pure virtual class which deals with broad-phase collision detection. ResolverBase is a pure virtual class which deals with collision resolution. The bodies communicate to the World::SpatialBase* with SpatialInfo objects, owned by the bodies themselves. There currenly is one spatial class: Grid : SpatialBase, which is a basic fixed 2D grid. It has it's own info class, GridInfo : SpatialInfo. Here's how its architecture looks: The Grid class owns a 2D array of Cell*. The Cell class contains two collection of (not owned) Body*: a vector<Body*> which contains all the bodies that are in the cell, and a map<int, vector<Body*>> which contains all the bodies that are in the cell, divided in groups. Bodies, in fact, have a groupId int that is used for collision groups. GridInfo objects also contain non-owning pointers to the cells the body is in. As I previously said, the engine is based on groups. Body::getGroups() returns a vector<int> of all the groups the body is part of. Body::getGroupsToCheck() returns a vector<int> of all the groups the body has to check collision against. Bodies can occupy more than a single cell. GridInfo always stores non-owning pointers to the occupied cells. After the bodies move, collision detection happens. We assume that all bodies are axis-aligned bounding boxes. How broad-phase collision detection works: Part 1: spatial info update For each Body body: Top-leftmost occupied cell and bottom-rightmost occupied cells are calculated. If they differ from the previous cells, body.gridInfo.cells is cleared, and filled with all the cells the body occupies (2D for loop from the top-leftmost cell to the bottom-rightmost cell). body is now guaranteed to know what cells it occupies. For a performance boost, it stores a pointer to every map<int, vector<Body*>> of every cell it occupies where the int is a group of body->getGroupsToCheck(). These pointers get stored in gridInfo->queries, which is simply a vector<map<int, vector<Body*>>*>. body is now guaranteed to have a pointer to every vector<Body*> of bodies of groups it needs to check collision against. These pointers are stored in gridInfo->queries. Part 2: actual collision checks For each Body body: body clears and fills a vector<Body*> bodiesToCheck, which contains all the bodies it needs to check against. Duplicates are avoided (bodies can belong to more than one group) by checking if bodiesToCheck already contains the body we're trying to add. const vector<Body*>& GridInfo::getBodiesToCheck() { bodiesToCheck.clear(); for(const auto& q : queries) for(const auto& b : *q) if(!contains(bodiesToCheck, b)) bodiesToCheck.push_back(b); return bodiesToCheck; } The GridInfo::getBodiesToCheck() method IS THE BOTTLENECK. The bodiesToCheck vector must be filled for every body update because bodies could have moved meanwhile. It also needs to prevent duplicate collision checks. The contains function simply checks if the vector already contains a body with std::find. Collision is checked and resolved for every body in bodiesToCheck. That's it. So, I've been trying to optimize this broad-phase collision detection for quite a while now. Every time I try something else than the current architecture/setup, something doesn't go as planned or I make assumption about the simulation that later are proven to be false. My question is: how can I optimize the broad-phase of my collision engine maintaining the grouped bodies approach? Is there some kind of magic C++ optimization that can be applied here? Can the architecture be redesigned in order to allow for more performance? Actual implementation: SSVSCollsion Body.h, Body.cpp World.h, World.cpp Grid.h, Grid.cpp Cell.h, Cell.cpp GridInfo.h, GridInfo.cpp

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >