Celestia 1.7.0 Development Thread

[pirogronian]

the qt version has the same low fps problem as before.

Are You sure option Display -> Fps is set to Auto?

[onetwothree]

I think you should make an official, downloadable release named Celestia 1.7 with an exe file.

We don't have a maintainer to support win release.

[Janus]

If anyone cares, here is 5547 Vanilla compiled just now.
THIS IS NON QT.
VS2015, all libraries static linked.
Lua is 5.3 if anyone is interested.

If desired, I can put a complete ready to run archive up.


Janus.

[Goofy]

Green light from me, Janus, please upload the ready to run archive.
Thank you, appreciated.
Goofy

[Janus]

Okay then.

http://celestia.simulatorlabbs.com/Downloads/

Look for commit-5547, they are labelled by commit number so finding it is simple.


Janus.

[Lafuente_Astronomy]

Lafuente, I just joked! See an emoticon smile at the end of my post. I just like language humor...

Ahhh. I just don't want to hurt anyone of you here, you all are good people just doing what's good for Celestia, and I don't want to be a black sheep here. So, just in case, I had to apologize

[john71]

Are You sure option Display -> Fps is set to Auto?

Yes, but the fps rate is lower, than in the win version. Usually 13-21, which is - in my opinion - not acceptable in an official release.

Consider this: first I sensed the low fps problem without any concrete fps monitoring. It is simply annoying.

By the way, very nice work with the fps interface feature!!!!!!!!!!!!



Added after 6 minutes 23 seconds:

We don't have a maintainer to support win release.

That's OK, zip file is good too. What I mean is that the release should be

a.) complete in itself, without the need for additional files (it should not be an update file)

b.) downloadable as a single file.

In my opinion the qt version should not be released until the fps problem is resolved.

But the win version is ready.

In my opinion the totally functioning 64 bit version is the core of the 1.7 version.

People should not use 1.6.1 anymore.

Added after 11 minutes 18 seconds:
What is strange in the qt version is that the fps rate suddenly drops from 60 to 35 when approaching a planet with a lot of moons and spacecraft. When at the planet, after marking an orbiting spacecraft, it drops further to 6.8.

[Goofy]

Thanks a lot, Janus, well done!

Goofy

[pirogronian]

What is strange in the qt version is that the fps rate suddenly drops from 60 to 35 when approaching a planet with a lot of moons and spacecraft. When at the planet, after marking an orbiting spacecraft, it drops further to 6.8.

As both versions use the same render code, the difference may lay in OpenGL initialization. But I'm not experienced with this topic.

[onetwothree]

Help->OpenGL info, what does it show?

[Janus]

Actually, QT takes over opengl handling with its own routines, including one that translates opengl into directx, or another that drops back to software rendering if it decides to.

Been reading up on this mess while I try to compile the opensource version of QT for static linkage.
So I can do static linked QT version of stuff.
Despite starting with a clean install, QT will not let me select 5.10.x at all.
After a few days of fighting it, I have decided that QT is not worth my time.

As bad as it is, Wxwidgets is better documented, and more straight forward.


Janus.

[onetwothree]

Actually, QT takes over opengl handling with its own routines, including one that translates opengl into directx, or another that drops back to software rendering if it decides to.

We configure qt to use desktop gl explicitly: https://github.com/CelestiaProject/Celestia/blob/ ... src/celestia/qt/qtmain.cpp#L68, so we don't use any translators, I even don't provide that dll now.

As bad as it is, Wxwidgets is better documented, and more straight forward.

WxWidgets dropped into the same trap - they provide own implementation for stl types (at least string). I'd like to have just a GUI library, maybe fltk is worth attention.

[john71]

Actually, QT takes over opengl handling with its own routines,

I'm not a programmer, but my instinct tells me the same. The qt version behaves differently, than the win version.

So it must be some kind of internal qt property or unintentional error. Qt runs opengl differently.

[Janus]

@onetwothree

As far as I know Wxwidgets can be compiled to use native controls only.
Which I will be tinkering with so can I learn it better.
I have some down time while my current consult's management explain money to the engineers, who explain back about these pesky things called physics and logic.
Management thinks object oriented programming black boxes are magic, not understanding that OOP becomes oops in proportion to the mass being moved.

@john71

A google search shows many complaints about QT5 being slow compared to QT4 with opengl.
Sadly, opengl is not something I know much about.
The best I have is a QT5.13.0 x64 build, would you mind testing it to see if it behaves the same?
If so, I can put up a working archive.
I did a clean QT install, but 5.10 was not listed.

EDIT: I just added celestia-5547-qt-test.7z to my downloads.
This is an x64, VS2015, QT5.13.0 build in a ready to run archive.
DLL support files added by windeployqt automatically.
It works on my system, but would like to know if it does for others.
Also contains a working VS2015 only static linked version.
I have spent hours trying to figure out why QT crashes in one of three test VMs I use, and I have had enough.
Today has reminded me how much I dislike QT.


Janus.

[pirogronian]

Someone else already had and fixed such a or similar issue with qt on macosx: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/31030364/qt-opengl-osx-rendering-slow-windows-fast-on-same-machine

[onetwothree]

Seems not, that guy just had an incorrect gl code. In John's case there are 2 possible problems: 1) qt version uses software gl, we need Help->"OpenGL info" output 2) qt incorrectly setups gl context, we need to figure out how to read context properties in windows.

[pirogronian]

Seems not, that guy just had an incorrect gl code

So, are you sure in Celestia gl code is fully corect?

[selden]

@Janus,

FWIW, your QT build runs on my ancient Dell laptop (running Win7 with current patches), but its window updates much more slowly than the non-QT version that's in the same folder.

The FPS shown by the QT version seems to be lying, though. It claims ~60fps but the window obviously is updating much more slowly than that. My simple test was to use the mouse to rotate the viewpoint around the Earth. The background stars in QT have a lot of lag. The non-QT version shows no such lag.

[john71]

The background stars in QT have a lot of lag. The non-QT version shows no such lag.

Thank you. I've been saying this for months.

Added after 1 minute 36 seconds:
I think the developers should officially release the 32 and 64 bit win (non-QT) version as Celestia 1.7.

[Janus]

@selden

Both the QT and VS versions generated from the same copy {5547} of the source code.
I lack the knowledge, and the interest in troubleshooting QT.
I am sticking with the VS version, and I like the UI on it better anyway.
The QT menus and controls do not make sense, and are harder to use.
The VS layout just flows better for me, though I understand that is not the case for everyone.
Everyone should use what works for them.


Janus.