I've got two questions, and I suspect that spike might be able to answer for fteqcc if nobody else can.

1) Is it possible in QC to have a function that returns a function - and if so, what is the syntax for that?

2) If 1) is possible, I would like a function that can return itself (or other functions with the same signature as itself). Is this possible, and how? 

if in doubt, typedef it.

typedef void() fnc;
fnc bar = {}; //or: void() bar={}; depends which you consider more correct/easier
fnc() foo = {return bar;};
void() test = {local var fnc t;t = foo();t();};

foo()(); isn't supported for some reason.
nor is void()(). bah.
seems the return statement doesn't do strict checks beyond basic types, must fix some day.
needing to define a local function as var is also worrying, one day I'll want to be able to define functions inside functions, I believe it should be possible to parse nested functions automatically, but I'm paranoid enough to not fix that until then.
on the plus side, void()foo()={return bar;}; also works! yay for mixing notation.


a function that returns itself ad infinitum is problematic. probably best to define the function as returning a __variant, seeing as you'll need to store it anyway before you can call it. qc can then suffer from the infinite type recursion itself. :P
I'm not sure what the advantage is though. 

Thanks for that, the plan is to do some contination-passing, state machine stuff. Thinking it might be easier to use a global rather than passing a return value, but the __variant trick would probably make it work... 

http://pecope.co/experiments/quake_web_tools/QuakeWebTools.html

I haven't really been working on this until the last couple of days, so it hasn't changed that much, but I added camera controls to the MDL viewer and you can now preview BSPs in 3d (though there is no lighting currently) with first person controls.

Seems to handle anything I throw at it too, which is surprising. Thought it would be easier to break :)

Anyway, I'm still planning to implement a proper UI at some point, but I have been concentrating on core file type support, which is about done now, but there is still a lot of cleanup that needs doing. 

in firefox the 3d panel doesn't capture keyboard input without bubbling it back to the browser, so when I try to hold w to move forward in a map the search bar appears and fills with wwwwwwwwwwwwww and then I lose the bsp forever in the darkness

I fed it a few jam2 maps and it seemed to like them, but I got to jam2_tronyn and a number of faces have flat colors or skewed stripes instead of properly projected textures. 

Aguirre's TXQBSP:

Error: NewWinding: 65 points?
After piles of healing point of plane warnings.

Tried using different epsilon values, but nothing gets rid of the error. 

Guessing in the dark i am.
Too many faces share the same plane? 

here what i got after talking to rebb.
There a hardcoded limit on MAX_POINTS_ON_WINDING
of 64 in TXQBSP. This "should be enough".
One can replace that with a dynamic array, resulting in performance loss.

Anyway, QBSP isn�t the deal here, vis does this check too. Again longer vistimes are the result(~ factor of 1.5 with a small testmap). 

Necros, there are testbuilds available at http://www.voidspark.net/projects/bjptools_xt/

soon.. 

rebb told me: those limits could just be raised in the codebase, but there are dangers of stackoverflows. Even today?
idk tbh 

It's probably safe to bump that limit to at least Half-Life compiler level where it's 128 instead of 64, and stack limits can be increased when compiling the compiler. The whole thing is meant to be a performance-optimization that matters mainly for Vis calculation times. 

thanks for helping me understand this mfx/rebb.


So yeah, the latest test version lets the map compile but what exactly is this winding stuff?
From what I remember when I briefly dabbled in 3D and openGL stuff, winding is some kind of method of storing your vertices and faces in memory...

I guess I'm asking how can I avoid doing this?

Too many faces share the same plane?
I think someone once said that there is a limited number of planes than can be used in one map, but that if you have faces with the same plane, it'll reuse that plane or something..?


Also rebb: texture offset for rotating objects!!!!!!! <3 

Thanks for the feedback. I haven't really tested in multiple browsers yet, but I'll check that out next time I work on it.

Not sure how I can fix the texture problem though, I noticed that myself but since the uvs are just generated from the bsp data I have no idea what is causing the problem. There are also some limitations with webgl, so any non-power of two textures could potentially cause problems depending on the system.

The bsp preview isn't really meant as an accurate bsp viewing tool though. Would be nice to add lightmaps and have a few display options though. 

extensions appear to be case-sensitive, meaning it'll refuse to load files copied off a fat32 drive (FOO.BSP).
no error message from trying to load q3/rbsp/bsp2 maps.
clicking files within a .pak doesn't seem to do anything (firefox).
it doesn't recognise .qc!
mdl rendering consumes an entire cpu core even when not given user input. 

thanks. I'll look into all those things.

Not sure what I should do with .qc files... What would you like it to do?

Firefox doesn't seem to handle the file url the same as chrome, since I'm not generating a data url until the user clicks a link, which basically equals me auto downloading a generated file for the user - perhaps it's a security risk? Anyway, chrome allows you to extract files currently, but I want to make it able to modify paks at some point.

Anyway, it's currently very hacky (esp. rendering), so I will fix some of this during the next code cleanup. 

Thanks a lot for this rebbor!! 

I have a vague recollections that windings are to do with the number of sides a polygon has. Do you possibly have a face anywhere with more than 64 edges? Perhaps not intentionally, but if you had lots of adjacent planes that nearly meet at the vertices but actually cut tiny slices, that might create one.... 

I'm not exactly sure what you mean. How could a face have 64 edges? They are all triangles. Or do you mean one plane that has been divided more than 64 times? 

In fact in glquake they're still polygons when passed to OpenGL. Just for fun I checked start.bsp and it has a 20-sided poly somewhere!

So "r_showtris 1" is a bit deceptive; it shows you the polygons as they come out of the bsp, plus a bunch of lines drawn in to divide them into triangles, but you can't see which lines are which. 

r_drawflat shows polygons. 

Windings are used in a lot of places in the code, also for portal generation. I think mfx managed to find a version of your map in your house while you were sleeping online and it had a very large ring-like structure in it with a lot of side elements.

If a portal is generated inside this, it can easily go over the 64 point limit and cause this error to be thrown. 

Breaking limits since 2003! 

Once you've found places where that happens, shouldn't it be possible to use a hint brush to break that ring in half/quarters/etc so that can't happen? 

Necros, the file flew by on the TB issuetracker, had to grab it to reproduce the error.
I also had no luck with epsilon values being changed slightly, but the hint/skip support of the above mentioned compilers should be able to eliminate the error.
Without having to raise the max_windings of course.. I keep you updated.

Sorry for any inconvience caused:) 

Cool, ok, so it is fixable then... Yet flying around in the map didn't show me anything obviously having tons of edges. Some faces had maybe 6 or 7 sides, but most were split up to 4 or less sides.

and it had a very large ring-like structure in it with a lot of side elements.
Not sure which map you're talking about, but this is a new one with a very similar concept. It is a large ring of windows. So since I don't see any faces with a lot of edges, it sounds like it must be this case where a portal is being generated inside this ring.