Hello Alexei,
> Do you know from your floating point version if q3 or r2 is larger
> when this happens? From your description it sounds like q3 is still
> larger than r2.
In this specific case where q3 becomes 0, r2 is always greater than
q3. But generally q3 can be greater than r2 in some cubic equation.
> In this case, if (r2 == 0) is missing here:
I just checked and r2 can also cause underflow, so yeah I should
check r2 == 0. But, this check only reduce the error it does not
eliminate it. I even checked increasing the precision but it still
happens, and increasing
precision also creates a risk of overflow.
So, I might have to think of something else.
Apart from that, I thought about another optimization:
Smooth rasterizer is ultra fast, it only takes a few nano-
seconds to render. So we can embolden the outline by
spread, render it with the smooth or monochrome rasterizer
and that will give us all the points that we need to check. It
can pair up well with the bounding box method.
Thanks,
Anuj