Yeah of course. Clipping are mainely for indoor scene, as well as portals.

A very very very very    super good new :

TEXTURES WORKS !!!! 

but it's slllllllloooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww 

Awesome!

BTW is the texture drawing done in axe? If so, you might want to consider converting it to assembly. Axe is a good and fast language, but for stuff like per-pixel drawing, assembly usually gets faster results.

Except for coding time. But of course, an Axe code written in a rush is not worth an ASM code written after optimization reflexions.

Yeah of course. Clipping are mainely for indoor scene, as well as portals.

A very very very very    super good new :

TEXTURES WORKS !!!! 

but it's slllllllloooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww 

But something I am wondering is what is the speed when drawing something like 6 walls and how fast does it get if you reduce the resolution so that it looks like 48x32, 96x32 or 48x64 instead of 96x64? In the past, I saw 3D engines reduce their resolutions in order to save speed, but I wasn't sure if this would help in your case.

Can we see a example of a bit more complex textures, please? (like more complex then a checkboard )

no, it' won't help. Resolution of screen is independent from the calculation process 
But in order to get speed I can decrease the drawing resolution of the texture, and they will be ugly 

Do you mean reduce the actual texture size or just make it more pixelated while making the outline standard? Reducing the texture size would probably look too ugly since it's already very small to begin with. >.<

Quote from: TheMachine02 on July 07, 2013, 04:56:39 am

no, it' won't help. Resolution of screen is independent from the calculation process 
But in order to get speed I can decrease the drawing resolution of the texture, and they will be ugly 

Do you mean reduce the actual texture size or just make it more pixelated while making the outline standard? Reducing the texture size would probably look too ugly since it's already very small to begin with. >.<

No, it's just make more pixelated when drawing.
I was thinking tomorrow for the next update, I hope I will have time to finish everything I want to do 

How about you make each pixel of a texture a border-less wall within the drawn wall? (just do a bit of one-time division for scaling)

would that potentially make it faster?

I think it would be way slower, since you'll have to do a lot more calculations during the drawing and some standard scanline optimisation techniques won't work as well.

Even then it would take more time. If he handles the drawing in a simular way as I do, some constants are calculated for each wall/triangle. For the rest it just relies on simple additions. Drawing a textured wall requires approximately three times the calculation time for the calculation at the start, and the additions that need to be done take almost three times the calculation time as well. Actually drawing a pixel takes approximately four times time on a textured wall than on a solid wall.
Creating a textured wall by positionning 64 tiny walls (an 8x8 texture has 64 pixels. For a 16x16 texture, you'll need 256 walls) in a rectangle means that the calculations of the constants for each wall has to be done 64 times. And as those calculations are quite slow, this would cause a huge slowdown (21.33 times slower than a texture).
Then, the calculations at the start of each scanline (a getPixel call and some additions) has to be done 8 times more (or 16 times more if you want 16x16) than on a regular wall (which makes this part 2.67 times slower than drawing a textured wall.
But acually drawing a pixel will take the same amount as a regular wall (because in this part, it actually is a regular wall) (so this part is four times faster than a textured wall)
When you add all of that up, it will be a lot slower, mainly because the slowest part has to be done 21.33 times more than when you use a texture.