[Bf-committers] About bug 675 - Analyse and possible solution

[Laurence Bourn]

Hello,
I was a bit confused by the explanations as to what exactly the problem =
was. Can the IK module do any sensible solving in the situation you =
describe? If not then put the if (goal_dir.fuzzyZero()) check into the =
IK module and return false. I don't know what is sensible todo from a =
user's point of view I'll leave that upto you guys. You're right, =
assertions are there to inform the developer that either the entry data =
to the module is incorrect or that an internal error has occurecd. In =
either case the module (IK) should be fixed so that the assertion is no =
longer fired - by returning a suitable error code in the first case or =
by fixing the internal problem in the second. Sounds to me like this is =
an example of the first case...

Cheers,
Laurence.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: bf-committers-admin@blender.org
> [mailto:bf-committers-admin@blender.org]On Behalf Of Stephane SOPPERA
> Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 6:31 PM
> To: bf-committers@blender.org
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] About bug 675 - Analyse and possible
> solution
>=20
>=20
> C Want wrote:
>=20
> >On Sun, 30 May 2004, Stephane SOPPERA wrote:
> > =20
> >
> >>On Linux I used scons with "debug" mode.
> >>   =20
> >>
> >
> >OK, I had to build it with scons to get it to crash
> >-- good detective work!
> >
> >I'll set it to turn red when the target for the
> >bone is it's owner armature and the subtarget
> >bone is invalid (unless this leads to many
> >complaints).
> > =20
> >
> Thanks
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> Stephane SOPPERA
> http://perso.wanadoo.fr/stephane.soppera=20
>=20
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers@blender.org
> http://www.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>=20