ZDoom

I made some changes to the auto-aligning, should produce results that make more sense. Also now aligns UDMF and non-UDMF maps the same way. It's a bit weird that nobody complained about it before. I noticed some weirdness before, but I always attributed it to the weird shapes of my sectors.

Much appreciated. I look forward to trying it out. Thank you.

boris, do you think it's possible to speed up builder handling large sectors with lots of subsectors like here?

https://imgur.com/a/4x7h7Tf

It takes almost a minute to edit single vertex that belongs to this giant sector and the task manager shows that GZDoom Builder BugFix occupies all the thread power to do that.
I've got 11 more threads that do nothing meanwhile, just saying. It's a problem for me because as soon as I divide this huge sector to pieces GZDoom goes absolutely mad about it and all the geometry just dies. I can for sure edit a particular area in a separate area having it copy and pasted but copy and pasting the stuff all the time is a thing that doesn't work perfectly all the time, so I still have to manually edit and wait until the wonder happen.

It's probably an issue with the code that traces sector outlines. It's complex and I don't understand it. Is that map available somewhere (or any other map that has this problem) so I can have a look at it?

I think I should prepare this map for you: https://youtu.be/BlvimDZDJO4?t=1307

Seems "check for off-grid vertices" is buggy in UDMF maps. The nodebuilder, as far as I'm aware allow vertices of positions as fine as 0.125 map pixels, but "check off-grid vertices" in UDMF maps trips off if anything is sub 1:1 mappixels. If this could be remedied, perhaps with an option in GZDB to prevent pasting, rotation, and line splitting (drawing over other lines) from making vertices at sub-0.125 positions, that'd be great.

I'd noticed that too, but assumed it was deliberate. Don't know why I assumed that tbh. I suppose they are off the traditional grid but in UDMF that doesn't matter. However, it has flagged up vertices that I did not mean to place at a sub 1 unit position on several occasions so it has been quite useful for me that it works the way it does. Perhaps the granularity of the check could be optioned somehow?

StrikerMan780 wrote:The nodebuilder, as far as I'm aware allow vertices of positions as fine as 0.125 map pixels

Is that documented somewhere or just hearsay? The UDMF specs don't say anything about resolution limitation The lowest grid setting in GZDB-BF is 0.125, but that doesn't really say anything (it has to stop somewhere, right?).

I don't really see a one-size-fits-all solution. Either you do not want to go below 1.0 grid - then the checker does what you want. Or you don't care, then you don't need the checker (unless, of course, there's indeed a limitation). What you can do is to switch to the 0.125 grid, select the whole map and go Edit -> Snap Selection to Grid.

Darkcrafter wrote:I think I should prepare this map for you: https://youtu.be/BlvimDZDJO4?t=1307

Will try to look at some point, however I don't understand GZDB sector splitting either, it's inherited from CodeImp... so no promises.
The most I did about these algorithms was changing the way autoalign and "select similar" works

boris wrote:

StrikerMan780 wrote:The nodebuilder, as far as I'm aware allow vertices of positions as fine as 0.125 map pixels

Is that documented somewhere or just hearsay? The UDMF specs don't say anything about resolution limitation The lowest grid setting in GZDB-BF is 0.125, but that doesn't really say anything (it has to stop somewhere, right?).

I don't really see a one-size-fits-all solution. Either you do not want to go below 1.0 grid - then the checker does what you want. Or you don't care, then you don't need the checker (unless, of course, there's indeed a limitation). What you can do is to switch to the 0.125 grid, select the whole map and go Edit -> Snap Selection to Grid.

I'm very certain it does allow more precision than 1.0 mappixels, because I can use it without incurring any slime trails or other weird bugs. With either --extended or --compress the precision is much higher than integer coordinates. Perhaps giving us an option for what we want to search for, or maybe based on your nodebuilder configuration would be helpful. 0.125 would be a decent safe value at least.

My reading of boris' comment was not that he was asking if the node builder allows precision of less than one, more that he was asking whether there was anything to suggest the limit on precision was 0.125 - which is what your post implies. That is the smallest level of granularity in the GZDB grid, but I do not know if the same is true for the node builder. Remember, the mapping interface and the node builder are not the same thing.

For what it's worth, I can't remember the last time i saw a slime trail in any map format. I assumed it was the gzdoom renderer as much as anything.

Enjay wrote:My reading of boris' comment was not that he was asking if the node builder allows precision of less than one, more that he was asking whether there was anything to suggest the limit on precision was 0.125 - which is what your post implies. That is the smallest level of granularity in the GZDB grid, but I do not know if the same is true for the node builder. Remember, the mapping interface and the node builder are not the same thing.

That's exactly what I meant.

Limiting yourself to 0.125 seems rather weird when using things that can get between those stept. Like rotating a 64x64 sector by 15°. Or using the grid align functionality It's like "I want to be off the grid! But just a little bit!".

Enjay wrote:My reading of boris' comment was not that he was asking if the node builder allows precision of less than one, more that he was asking whether there was anything to suggest the limit on precision was 0.125 - which is what your post implies. That is the smallest level of granularity in the GZDB grid, but I do not know if the same is true for the node builder. Remember, the mapping interface and the node builder are not the same thing.

For what it's worth, I can't remember the last time i saw a slime trail in any map format. I assumed it was the gzdoom renderer as much as anything.

I neither implied that, and neither did I say they were the same thing.

What do you think I am, stupid?

StrikerMan780 wrote:The nodebuilder, as far as I'm aware allow vertices of positions as fine as 0.125 map pixels

I'm sorry, but that most definitely does imply that the node builder is limited to a precision of 0.125 units. No one was calling you stupid, so no need for that kind of response, but if two people who are also not stupid interpreted your post that way, it must have carried that implication - intended or not.

By the way, how does the 3D Floor mode work? I don't understand exactly how it works, when I try to use it and add a sector I get a message on the screen saying: "No space left for control sectors Please increase the size of the control area."