Doom Comic
Register | User Profile | Member List | F.A.Q | Privacy Policy | New Blog | Search Forums | Forums Home
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Special Interest > Eternity > URGENT: what are the limits
 
Author
All times are GMT. The time now is 22:32. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Mordeth
Administrator


Posts: 1964
Registered: 05-00


Urgent question: what are the maximum limits of the Eternity engine for the number of vertices, linedefs, sidedefs, sectors, etc etc ?

Old Post 09-23-03 19:41 #
Mordeth is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Fredrik


Posts: 11684
Registered: 05-00


Last time I checked, Quasar had not changed anything about the original limits, which are all at 32768 except for the blockmap which is at 65536.

Old Post 09-23-03 20:12 #
Fredrik is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Cyb


Posts: 3202
Registered: 07-02


you can have unlimited things though :P

Old Post 09-23-03 20:30 #
Cyb is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Anders
No one knows I'm schepe


Posts: 428
Registered: 03-02


those are limits of the .wad-format btw. that's why they're still there.

__________________
++++++++++[>++++++++++>++++++++++++>+++++++++++>++
+>+<<<<<-]>.>-.>>++.<<<++.>>+.+++.<--.>-----.+++++
+.>.<<<-----.>>-.<<++++.>>>.<<<++.------.>++++.>>>.

Old Post 09-23-03 22:23 #
Anders is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Fredrik


Posts: 11684
Registered: 05-00



schepe said:
those are limits of the .wad-format btw. that's why they're still there.
No, they're limits of Doom's internal level format. WADs can be used as containers for any map formats.

Old Post 09-23-03 22:27 #
Fredrik is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Anders
No one knows I'm schepe


Posts: 428
Registered: 03-02


strictly speaking, yes. but for simplicity i would say that the format of the LINES lump is a part of the .wad format.

__________________
++++++++++[>++++++++++>++++++++++++>+++++++++++>++
+>+<<<<<-]>.>-.>>++.<<<++.>>+.+++.<--.>-----.+++++
+.>.<<<-----.>>-.<<++++.>>>.<<<++.------.>++++.>>>.

Old Post 09-23-03 22:29 #
Anders is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Cyb


Posts: 3202
Registered: 07-02


all structures in wads are limited to 65536 in amount by the stock format (unless you can have negative lindefs etc or something), 32k is an engine limit

it wouldn't be overly hard to expand the format slightly so that the numbers of structures within other structures were stored in 3 or 4 bytes instead of just 2 (4 would probably be better) and make the engine (and map editors) read from it, as far as I know zdoom can already do that in memory (I know it can build more segs than the wad limit allows)

Old Post 09-23-03 22:36 #
Cyb is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Anders
No one knows I'm schepe


Posts: 428
Registered: 03-02


no, since the format is define such that some things should be a signed word, and not an unsigned, it's a limitation of the format.

__________________
++++++++++[>++++++++++>++++++++++++>+++++++++++>++
+>+<<<<<-]>.>-.>>++.<<<++.>>+.+++.<--.>-----.+++++
+.>.<<<-----.>>-.<<++++.>>>.<<<++.------.>++++.>>>.

Old Post 09-23-03 22:38 #
Anders is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Cyb


Posts: 3202
Registered: 07-02


well that makes sense as to why the limits are all 32k, but at the same time it doesn't make any sense to store the amount of something (lines, sidedefs, verts etc) in a signed number

Old Post 09-23-03 23:13 #
Cyb is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Graf Zahl
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 7626
Registered: 01-03



schepe said:
no, since the format is define such that some things should be a signed word, and not an unsigned, it's a limitation of the format.



That's utter nonsense because these values cannot be negative anyway (except the sidedef index -1 but that special case can be easily take care of.) The fields are 2 bytes and there is absolutely nothing except the dumb definition of these values as 'signed' in the code that keeps the engine from reading larger numbers correctly. Storing them is no problem whatsoever. Without changing anything about the format it is shockingly easy to expand the size of most of these structures (excluding subsectors and nodes) to 65535 (which should be more than enough for the time being - after all it doubles the potential level size!) All that has to be done is change a few short definitions to unsigned short (or int for internal structures) in the source and you are done!

Old Post 09-23-03 23:15 #
Graf Zahl is online now Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Anders
No one knows I'm schepe


Posts: 428
Registered: 03-02



Graf Zahl said:



That's utter nonsense because these values cannot be negative anyway (except the sidedef index -1 but that special case can be easily take care of.) The fields are 2 bytes and there is absolutely nothing except the dumb definition of these values as 'signed' in the code that keeps the engine from reading larger numbers correctly. Storing them is no problem whatsoever. Without changing anything about the format it is shockingly easy to expand the size of most of these structures (excluding subsectors and nodes) to 65535 (which should be more than enough for the time being - after all it doubles the potential level size!) All that has to be done is change a few short definitions to unsigned short (or int for internal structures) in the source and you are done!



I know.

__________________
++++++++++[>++++++++++>++++++++++++>+++++++++++>++
+>+<<<<<-]>.>-.>>++.<<<++.>>+.+++.<--.>-----.+++++
+.>.<<<-----.>>-.<<++++.>>>.<<<++.------.>++++.>>>.

Old Post 09-24-03 00:32 #
Anders is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Mordeth
Administrator


Posts: 1964
Registered: 05-00


Ok, seems I just hit the SEGS upper limit :( Also, are you sure about the blockmap limit? I seem to remember I bumped that one up to 114K without problem... I'll have to check at home for the exact numbers.

I really REALLY hate restrictions and/or limits :(

Old Post 09-24-03 07:52 #
Mordeth is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Graf Zahl
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 7626
Registered: 01-03



Mordeth said:
Also, are you sure about the blockmap limit? I seem to remember I bumped that one up to 114K without problem... I'll have to check at home for the exact numbers.

I really REALLY hate restrictions and/or limits :(



Eternity is able to rebuild the blockmap if it gets too large (more than 128k) so that shouldn't be a problem at all.

Old Post 09-24-03 10:10 #
Graf Zahl is online now Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Mordeth
Administrator


Posts: 1964
Registered: 05-00


Ok, I'm now pretty sure it was the SEGS limit. The sidedef count was also dangerously close to 32K as well. Anyway, guess I'm forced to split that level up.

Old Post 09-25-03 09:19 #
Mordeth is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Quasar
Moderator


Posts: 5757
Registered: 08-00


I would have to find (or preferably be given) information on what editors are available that can support this. There's not much use to removing the limits if to use it, you need a half-done editor and are restricted to a single node builder.

Old Post 10-04-03 20:31 #
Quasar is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Lüt
Administrator


Posts: 9170
Registered: 05-00


DeepSea and DoomBuilder both support large maps (thus far), but even more than that, two of the biggest projects using the engine would make good use of it :) There's a few Millennium levels I suppose I could split and rework, but it would be nice to keep them intact. Or, I could just release them for ZDoom :P * watches Quasar frantically add large map support

__________________
Technology sucks.

Old Post 10-05-03 03:10 #
Lüt is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
DooMBoy
Heh
(but Stupidity still cannot be concealed)


Posts: 8509
Registered: 12-00



Lüt said:
Or, I could just release them for ZDoom :P
Good idea.

__________________
Heh

Old Post 10-05-03 04:27 #
DooMBoy is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Mordeth
Administrator


Posts: 1964
Registered: 05-00



Lüt said:
DeepSea and DoomBuilder both support large maps (thus far), but even more than that, two of the biggest projects using the engine would make good use of it :) There's a few Millennium levels I suppose I could split and rework, but it would be nice to keep them intact. Or, I could just release them for ZDoom :P * watches Quasar frantically add large map support


YAY!

Old Post 10-05-03 11:18 #
Mordeth is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Quasar
Moderator


Posts: 5757
Registered: 08-00


That's a pretty limited choice of editors. Do none of the external node builders support it? I grimace to think of people being forced to use internal ones which are USUALLY vastly inferior (maybe this has changed recently, but it was once a golden rule).

I will consider it. It definitely will not be in the beta 4 release, as I still have a pageful of EDF features to implement, not to mention ExtraData and Small, which have been on the backburner for so long that they're starting to smell burned.

Also, keep in mind that Eternity has latent capability for seamless travel between maps, which was part of the SMMU hub system. Once Small scripting is more fleshed out, this capability should re-emerge, and possibly in a more flexible manner (I don't see why it should be limited to hub exits, for instance). This might would cover *some* instances where large maps would be used (like taking a long one-way tunnel across to another large portion).

Old Post 10-07-03 20:09 #
Quasar is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Cyb


Posts: 3202
Registered: 07-02


I'm pretty sure deepbsp supports large map nodes, and zdbsp (the external version of zdoom's internal builder) does as well. I doubt zennode, warm, bsp etc do though since those haven't really been updated since large maps have been made possible

Old Post 10-07-03 20:55 #
Cyb is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
All times are GMT. The time now is 22:32. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
 
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Special Interest > Eternity > URGENT: what are the limits

Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread

 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are OFF
[IMG] code is ON
 

< Contact Us - Doomworld >

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.2.5
Copyright ©2000, 2001, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.

Message Board Statistics