yade-dev team mailing list archive

[Bruno Chareyre <bruno.chareyre@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > Remaining problem: who deletes interaction that was ever only 
> > potential and now there is no AABB overlap anymore? It would have to 
> > keep track of when was the interaction seen last (something like 
> > Interaction::cycle). I propose long Interaction::lastSeen for 
> > iteration number. All interactions that are isNew && !isReal && 
> > lastSeen<currentIteration can be deleted safely. Whould that be OK? 
> > Currently, PersistentSAPCollider sets isReal=false at the beginning 
> > of the loop.
>
> Mmmh... Is there really a problem here? What is the difference with 
> 1.b) above?
> You can let the collider delete those interactions, disregarding the 
> "lastseen" iteration.

Remember the interractions are deleted in two places. If your deleting 
process does not handle the isNew / !isReal, the older process does that :

else if(!overlap && found && (haveDistantTransient ? 
!interaction->isReal : true) ){
       //LOG_DEBUG("Erasing interaction #"<<id1<<"=#"<<id2<<" 
(isReal="<<interaction->isReal<<")");
       transientInteractions->erase(body_id_t(id1),body_id_t(id2));


Additional note :
I wonder if isNew should not be set false when !isReal (I thought it was 
the case already), so that an interaction couldn't be in the (!isReal && 
!isNew) for more than 1 iteration. It would avoid using junk data from a 
previous contact in touch/detach/touch scenarii.

Bruno



--

_______________
Chareyre Bruno
Maitre de conference

Grenoble INP
Laboratoire 3SR - bureau E145
BP 53 - 38041, Grenoble cedex 9 - France
Tél : 33 4 56 52 86 21
Fax : 33 4 76 82 70 43
________________