POD Utils OGLES-1.1-2.04 bug

This topic contains 1 reply, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  Scott 8 years, 8 months ago.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #29760

    gfm
    Member

    I found this extremely irritating:

    I downloaded the latest PVR OGLES 1.1 SDK (OGLES-1.1_WINDOWS_PCEMULATION_2.04.24.0765) and discovered that, not only did the POD file format completely change from 2.02, the old POD format is not compatible and the new POD loading code does not detect the incompatibility–it just walks off a data structure and crashes.

    I’d update but I already have a lot of code that pokes at the 2.02 format. Plus I can’t find any release notes describing differences so I’m not sure why I should upgrade anyways. The main thing that changed between 2.04 and 2.02 that I need is the translation component of a node. That functionality got moved (removed?) and I couldn’t (quickly) find where it went.

    #32920

    Scott
    Moderator

    Hi,

     

    Firstly apologies for any inconvenience our change to the .pod format has caused you.

     

    The old .pod binaries should happily work with the new tools loading code but .pod headers won’t. As of our 2.3 release we recommend that developers no longer use POD headers but instead use the binaries and our filewrap utility to compile them into their apps. Reason being the binary format is more flexible for adding new features where as with headers we have to careful consider our changes. Unfortunately though we try to maintain backwards/forward compatibility sometimes we can’t do it.

     

    You are correct the changes to the .pod format are absent from the release notes, again sorry this was an oversight. The individual translation component (as well as the rotation and scale) were removed as if the node was animated it just held duplicate data. The translation when the node is not animated is now stored in the array that would typically hold the animation data.

     

    We currently have no intention to make further changes to the .pod format that may break compatibility.

     

    Thanks

     

    Scott
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.