Good day!
Have issue with memory handling. I read lots of forums but still can't find whats wrong with my code.
I'm working on project where I combine d3.js with three.js to visualize nodes like planets on orbits in space.
I have a lot of data - like 8K planets in 8+ orbits. But when I try to load new data - I can't destroy current tree without memory leak.
I would be grateful for any help! Here is part of code where I create planets and where I try to destroy them:
function initTree(root) {
var start, end;
var nodes = tree.nodes(root); //this is d3.js tree init
var depth = getDepth(root);
var first_x_offset = nodes[0].x;
if (isNaN(first_x_offset)) {first_x_offset = 0}
//create orbits
var orbitTexture = new THREE.ImageUtils.loadTexture('img/orbit_texture.png');
var orbitMaterial = new THREE.MeshBasicMaterial({map: orbitTexture, transparent:true, side: THREE.DoubleSide, alphaTest: 0.05, opacity:0.3});
var sphereGeometry = new THREE.SphereGeometry(1, 6, 6);
var orbitSize = 30;
for (var k=1; k<depth; k++) {
var orbit = new THREE.Mesh(new THREE.CircleGeometry(orbitSize*k, 64), orbitMaterial);
orbit.rotation.x = -90*Math.PI/180;
orbit.name = 'orbit';
scene.add(orbit);
}
//end orbits
//camera position
camera.position.x = 0;
camera.position.y = 70;
camera.position.z = -orbitSize*depth-100;
controls.target.x = 0;
controls.target.y = 0;
controls.target.z = 0;
camera.up.x = 0;
camera.up.y = 1;
camera.up.z = 0;
//this is parent object to place in center
var parent = new THREE.Object3D();
parent.name = 'parent';
scene.add(parent);
y=0;
spheres = {};
objects = [];
nodes.forEach(function(d) {
if (d.type == 'BLANK') {return}
d.x = d.x - first_x_offset;
if (isNaN(d.x)) {d.x = 0}
var sphereMaterial = new THREE.MeshLambertMaterial({color: 0xdddddd, wireframe: false, opacity: 0.7, transparent: true});
var sphere = new THREE.Mesh(sphereGeometry, sphereMaterial );
sphere.material.color.setHex(color_type[d.type]);
sphere.castShadow = false; //maybe change to true
sphere.id2 = y;
d.id2 = y;
sphere.d = d;
sphere.scale.x = radius_type[d.type];
sphere.scale.y = radius_type[d.type];
sphere.scale.z = radius_type[d.type];
sphere.name = 'sphere';
spheres[y] = sphere;
//count items of each type
count_type[d.type]++;
//how many nodes in tree
y++;
//create pivot
var pivot = new THREE.Object3D;
//rotate it
pivot.rotation.y = d.x*Math.PI/180-90;
//append to parent
pivot.name = 'pivot';
parent.add(pivot);
//add mesh to pivot
var default_distance = size/(depth-1);
if (d.y > 0) {
d.y = (Math.round(d.y/default_distance)) * (orbitSize-8.8);
}
sphere.position.x = d.y;
sphere.position.y = 0; //should be 0!
sphere.position.z = d.y;
objects.push(sphere);
pivot.add(sphere);
});
nodesLength = y;
render();
$('.loading').fadeOut(500);
if (!animationId) {
animate();
}
temp = null;
nodes = null;
}
So I'm adding spheres to parent Object3D and then add it to scene.
And here is destroy function:
function destroyTree() {
//spheres
//console.log(renderer.info);
var to_delete = [];
for (var i=0; i<spheres.length; i++) {
scene.remove(spheres[i]);
spheres[i].material.dispose();
spheres[i].geometry.dispose();
}
for (var i=0; i<spheres.length; i++) {
spheres[i] = undefined;
}
spheres = {};
for (var i=0; i<objects.length; i++) {
scene.remove(objects[i]);
}
for (var i=0; i<objects.length; i++) {
objects[i] = undefined;
}
objects = [];
var parent = scene.getObjectByName('parent');
scene.remove(parent);
if (links.length) {
for (var i=0; i<links.length; i++) {
scene.remove(links[i]);
}
}
links = [];
scene.traverse(function (child) {
if (child instanceof THREE.Mesh) {
if (child.name.length) {
to_delete.push(child);
}
}
});
for (var i=0; i<to_delete.length; i++) {
scene.remove(to_delete[i]);
to_delete[i].geometry.dispose();
to_delete[i].material.dispose();
to_delete[i] = undefined;
}
to_delete = [];
}
Wouldn't traversing the scene find the spheres too? And in that loop you could dispose directly without need for the to_delete array. If all speres are not children of the scene then maybe reconsider when to create them? These would just be optimizations and probably do little other then clarify where it might be leaking.
Then again maybe try holding an array of textures and releasing those directly?
Wait here it is, this link says to remove the objects and textures from the renderer as well.
Memory leak in Three.js
renderer.deallocateObject
renderer.deallocateTexture
Related
So I used the solution from this thread How to draw a polygon around a polyline in JavaScript? to solve my problem that I needed to have a radius drawn along a path. However it looks lopsided, like an oval when I use this method, even though on the thread the result doesn't look like this. I'm not using directions to generate my points, I already have an array of points that I'm passing to the function
here is what it currently looks like
function drawRadius(map, path, radius, factor)
{
let radial = [];
overviewPathGeo = [];
for (var i = 0; i < path.length; i++) {
overviewPathGeo.push(
[path[i].lng, path[i].lat]
);
}
var distance = (radius/1000.0) / 111.12, // Roughly 10km
geoInput = {
type: "LineString",
coordinates: overviewPathGeo
};
var geoReader = new jsts.io.GeoJSONReader(),
geoWriter = new jsts.io.GeoJSONWriter();
var geometry = geoReader.read(geoInput).buffer(distance);
var polygon = geoWriter.write(geometry);
var oLanLng = [];
var oCoordinates;
oCoordinates = polygon.coordinates[0];
for (i = 0; i < oCoordinates.length; i++) {
var oItem;
oItem = oCoordinates[i];
oLanLng.push(new google.maps.LatLng(oItem[1], oItem[0]));
}
var polygone = new google.maps.Polygon({
paths: oLanLng,
map:map
});
radial.push(polygone);
distance = ((radius*factor)/1000.0) / 111.12, // Roughly 10km
geoInput = {
type: "LineString",
coordinates: overviewPathGeo
};
geoReader = new jsts.io.GeoJSONReader(),
geoWriter = new jsts.io.GeoJSONWriter();
geometry = geoReader.read(geoInput).buffer(distance);
polygon = geoWriter.write(geometry);
oLanLng = [];
oCoordinates;
oCoordinates = polygon.coordinates[0];
for (i = 0; i < oCoordinates.length; i++) {
var oItem;
oItem = oCoordinates[i];
oLanLng.push(new google.maps.LatLng(oItem[1], oItem[0]));
}
polygone = new google.maps.Polygon({
paths: oLanLng,
map:map
});
radial.push(polygone);
return radial;
}
I want to create a simple app in three.js
For this app, I need to subtract two meshes and I have found that ThreeCSG can do this. But somehow I don't get the expected result.
I have copied the code from an example, but even this doesn't work properly.
Trying some other function like the union. But instead of merging two meshes into one it removes it.
link to ThreeCSG: https://github.com/chandlerprall/ThreeCSG/blob/master/ThreeCSG.js
result that I get when subtracting
result that I get when I use union
var materialNormal = new THREE.MeshNormalMaterial( { side: THREE.DoubleSide } );
var diceCube = new THREE.Mesh( new THREE.BoxGeometry(10,10,10), materialNormal);
diceCube.position.x = 0;
diceCube.position.y = 5;
diceCube.position.z = 0;
diceCube.geometry.computeFaceNormals();
diceCube.geometry.computeVertexNormals();
var cubeBSP = new ThreeBSP(diceCube);
var sphereGeometry = new THREE.SphereGeometry(7.5,16,8);
var sphereMesh = new THREE.Mesh(sphereGeometry, materialNormal);
sphereMesh.scale.x = 0.17;
sphereMesh.scale.y = 0.17;
sphereMesh.scale.z = 0.17;
//coords of the spheres
var xPositions = [ 0, 3 ]; // coordinates for xPositions of sphereMesh
var yPositions = [ 10, 10 ];
var zPositions = [ 0, 0 ];
var diceDots = new THREE.Geometry();
for(var i = 0; i < xPositions.length; i++){
sphereMesh.position.x = xPositions[i];
sphereMesh.position.y = yPositions[i];
sphereMesh.position.z = zPositions[i];
sphereMesh.updateMatrix();
diceDots.merge( sphereMesh.geometry, sphereMesh.matrix );
}
var material = new THREE.MeshPhongMaterial( { color: 0xffaa00 });
var dotsMesh = new THREE.Mesh(diceDots);
dotsMesh.geometry.computeFaceNormals();
dotsMesh.geometry.computeVertexNormals();
var dotsBSP = new ThreeBSP(dotsMesh);
var resultBSP = cubeBSP.subtract(dotsBSP);
result = resultBSP.toMesh(material);
scene.add(result);
I have found a solution.
The threeCSG I used was corrupted this one works exactly how it must be done.
Link to working ThreeCSG: https://github.com/oathihs/ThreeCSG/blob/master/dist/THREE.CSG.js
I have made a collision detection. You can place objects at the raycaster/mouse position on a floor. Therefore you need to click on a button 'Add object', then you get a object(helper) that follows the mouse to see if the new object get a collision with another object. When you click on the position you want, the new object will be placed to the world if there is no collision.
The collision detection I have made works perfectly when the object that is already placed in the world has the same size as the helper/new object.
On the next screenshot you can see a big object and a small(red) helper. The color red means that there is a collision. When I move the mouse more to the right it turns green.
Why does my collision detection work only with 2 objects that have the same size and why doesn't it not with different ones?
Here is my code in the Click event to show the big object:
var geometry = new THREE.BoxGeometry(200, 200, 300);
var bigobject = new THREE.Mesh(geometry, new THREE.MeshBasicMaterial({
color: 0xFBF5D7,
opacity: 1
}));
bigobject.position.copy(intersects[0].point);
bigobject.position.y = 100;
objects.push(bigobject);
scene.add(bigobject);
Here is my code to show the helper when the button 'Add object' is clicked:
var geometry = new THREE.BoxGeometry( 50, 50, 100 );
helper = new THREE.Mesh( geometry, new THREE.MeshBasicMaterial( { color: 0x00ff00, opacity: 1 } ) );
helper.name = 'helper';
scene.add( helper );
Here is my code in the MouseMove event to detect the collision:
if(scene.getObjectByName( 'helper' )) {
helper.position.copy( intersects[ 0 ].point );
helper.position.y = 25;
var helperWidth = helper.geometry.parameters.width;
var helperLength = helper.geometry.parameters.depth;
var validpositionObject = true;
for (var i = 0; i < objects.length; i++) {
var objectWidth = objects[i].geometry.parameters.width;
var objectLength = objects[i].geometry.parameters.depth;
// MIN X
var helperMinX = helper.position.x;
var objectMinX = objects[i].position.x;
// MAX X
var helperMaxX = helperWidth + helper.position.x;
var objectMaxX = objectWidth + objects[i].position.x;
// MIN Z
var helperMinZ = helper.position.z;
var objectMinZ = objects[i].position.z;
// MAX Z
var helperMaxZ = helperLength + helper.position.z;
var objectMaxZ = objectLength + objects[i].position.z;
if (objectMinX <= helperMaxX && objectMaxX >= helperMinX && objectMinZ <= helperMaxZ && objectMaxZ >= helperMinZ) {
validpositionObject = false;
}
}
if ( validpositionObject === true ) {
helper.material.color.setHex( 0x00ff00 );
validposition = true;
}else{
helper.material.color.setHex( 0xff0000 );
validposition = false;
}
}
What goes wrong with the position when it is a big and a small object.. Can anyone help me in the right direction? Many thanks
Use this:
function collisonXZ(o1, o2) {
if (Math.abs(o1.position.x - o2.position.x) > (o1.geometry.parameters.width + o2.geometry.parameters.width) / 2)
return false;
if (Math.abs(o1.position.z - o2.position.z) > (o1.geometry.parameters.depth + o2.geometry.parameters.depth) / 2)
return false;
return true;
}
var validpositionObject = true;
for (var i = 0; i < objects.length; i++) {
if (collisionXZ(helper, objects[i])) {
validpositionObject = false;
break;
}
}
I can't seem to figure out why my code doesn't work. What I'm essentially trying to do is generate a 10x10 tile based map using arrays.
The idea is to create an object called Box with an 'x' and 'y' axis property and also an image object within the box. Then, each position in the 2d array is populated with a box object.
I then want to draw all these arrays out on a canvas. Each tile(or array element) is a 64x64 box.
const ROW = 10;
const COLS = 11;
const SIZE = 64;
var canvas = document.getElementById("canvas");
var surface = canvas.getContext("2d");
//creating tile
function box() {
this.xaxis = 56;
this.yaxis = 0;
this.img = new Image();
this.img.src = "box_image.png";
}
//creating map
var map =[];
function setMap() {
for (var i = 0; i < ROW; i++) {
for (var o = 0; o < COLS; o++) {
map[i][o] = new box();
}
}
}
//rendering map
function render() {
for (var i = 0; i < map.length; i++) {
for (var x = 0; x < map.length; x++) {
var tile = map[i][x];
tile.xaxis *= i;
tile.yaxis *= x;
surface.drawImage(tile.img, tile.xaxis, tile.yaxis, 64, 64);
}
}
}
setTimeout(render, 10);
Adding a few elements you forgot, here's how I would do it.
Fiddle
HTML
<canvas id="canvas" width="1000" height="1000"></canvas>
<!-- set canvas size -->
JS
const ROW = 10;
const COLS = 11;
const SIZE = 64;
var canvas = document.getElementById("canvas");
var surface = canvas.getContext("2d");
//creating tile
function box() {
this.xaxis = 56;
this.yaxis = 0;
this.src = "https://cdn4.iconfinder.com/data/icons/video-game-adicts/1024/videogame_icons-01-128.png"; //save path to image
}
//creating map
var map =[];
function setMap() {
for (var i = 0; i < ROW; i++) {
var arr = []; //make new row
map.push(arr); //push new row
for (var o = 0; o < COLS; o++) {
map[i].push(new box()); //make and push new column element in current row
}
}
}
//rendering map
function render() {
for (var i = 0; i < ROW; i++) { //For each row
for (var x = 0; x < COLS; x++) { //And each column in it
var tile = map[i][x];
tile.xaxis *= i;
tile.yaxis += (x*SIZE); //increment y value
var img = new Image();
img.onload = (function(x,y) { //draw when image is loaded
return function() {
surface.drawImage(this, x, y, 64, 64);
}
})(tile.xaxis, tile.yaxis);
img.src = tile.src;
}
}
}
setMap(); //create the grid
render(); //render the grid
There are a number of errors in your code.
First you are loading the same image 110 times. Load it once and that will save a lot of memory and time.
You create a single dimetioned array map
map = [];
Then attempt to access to as a two dim map. map[i][o] that will not work. You need to create a new array for each row.
You create the function to populate the map setMap() but you never call the function.
The Boxes you create have the yaxis value set to 0. When you call render and multiply it by the column index the result will be zero, so you will only see one column of images. You need to set the yaxis value to some value (64)
Below is your code fixed up with some comments. I left the zero yaxis value as maybe that is what you wanted. The image is created only once and the onload event is used to call render When setMap is called I add a new array for each row. I call setMap at the bottom but can be called anytime after you declare and define var map = [];
const ROW = 10;
const COLS = 11;
const SIZE = 64;
const canvas = document.getElementById("canvas");
const surface = canvas.getContext("2d");
const image = new Image();
image.src = "box_image.png";
// onload will not fire until all the immediate code has finished running
image.onload = function(){render()}; // call render when the image has loaded
//creating tile
function Box() { // any function you call with new should start with a capital
this.xaxis = 56;
this.yaxis = 0; // should this not be something other than zero
this.img = image;
}
//creating map
const map =[];
function setMap() {
for (var i = 0; i < ROW; i++) {
var row = []; // new array for this row
map[i] = row;
for (var o = 0; o < COLS; o++) {
row[o] = new box();
}
}
}
//rendering map
function render() {
for (var i = 0; i < map.length; i++) {
for (var x = 0; x < map[i].length; x++) { // you had map.length you needed the array for row i which is map[i]
var tile = map[i][x];
tile.xaxis *= i;
tile.yaxis *= x; // Note you have zero for yaxis?? 0 times anything is zero
surface.drawImage(tile.img, tile.xaxis, tile.yaxis, 64, 64);
}
}
}
setMap(); // create the map
I have an interactive application mockup made with PaperJS but it still lacks a small feature. I need to draw a 2D grid (you know... that uniform mesh of lines that repeat endlessly over a surface), it will be used as guides for user interactions when dragging things over the screen (but the grid itself can be completely static).
I just don't know how to implement it in PaperJS. It can't be just a background image since it will be presented in different scales, also I wanted it to be rendered very fast since it will always be visible.
The type of grid I would like to draw is a 2D mesh centered grid, like in the example (a) of this picture:
Any enlightenment is welcome.
If all you want is lines:
var drawGridLines = function(num_rectangles_wide, num_rectangles_tall, boundingRect) {
var width_per_rectangle = boundingRect.width / num_rectangles_wide;
var height_per_rectangle = boundingRect.height / num_rectangles_tall;
for (var i = 0; i <= num_rectangles_wide; i++) {
var xPos = boundingRect.left + i * width_per_rectangle;
var topPoint = new paper.Point(xPos, boundingRect.top);
var bottomPoint = new paper.Point(xPos, boundingRect.bottom);
var aLine = new paper.Path.Line(topPoint, bottomPoint);
aLine.strokeColor = 'black';
}
for (var i = 0; i <= num_rectangles_tall; i++) {
var yPos = boundingRect.top + i * height_per_rectangle;
var leftPoint = new paper.Point(boundingRect.left, yPos);
var rightPoint = new paper.Point(boundingRect.right, yPos);
var aLine = new paper.Path.Line(leftPoint, rightPoint);
aLine.strokeColor = 'black';
}
}
drawGridLines(4, 4, paper.view.bounds);
If you want each rectangle to be a separate Path to hitTest for the individual rectangles:
var drawGridRects = function(num_rectangles_wide, num_rectangles_tall, boundingRect) {
var width_per_rectangle = boundingRect.width / num_rectangles_wide;
var height_per_rectangle = boundingRect.height / num_rectangles_tall;
for (var i = 0; i < num_rectangles_wide; i++) {
for (var j = 0; j < num_rectangles_tall; j++) {
var aRect = new paper.Path.Rectangle(boundingRect.left + i * width_per_rectangle, boundingRect.top + j * height_per_rectangle, width_per_rectangle, height_per_rectangle);
aRect.strokeColor = 'white';
aRect.fillColor = 'black';
}
}
}
drawGridRects(4, 4, paper.view.bounds);