I'm trying to draw only a sector/part of a circle, but currently I always get a full circle.
I use this to draw a circle:
glColor3f (0.25, 1.0, 0.25);
GLfloat angle, raioX=0.3f, raioY=0.3f;
GLfloat circle_points = 100.0f;
glBegin(GL_LINE_LOOP);
for (int i = 0; i < circle_points; i++) {
angle = 2*PI*i/circle_points;
glVertex2f(0.5+cos(angle)*raioX, 0.5+sin(angle)*raioY);
}
glEnd();
Assuming you want a sector as illustrated in the following diagram:
You will need to re-write your code this way:
glBegin (GL_LINE_LOOP);
glVertex2f (0.5f, 0.5f);
for (int i = 0; i < circle_points; i++) {
angle = 2*PI*i/circle_points;
glVertex2f (0.5+cos(angle)*raioX, 0.5+sin(angle)*raioY);
}
glEnd ();
The only thing I changed was the addition of the point 0.5,0.5 at the center of your circle. WIthout that point, you wind up drawing a segment instead of a sector.
As BDL points out, your original code drew a full circle. Your angle for 1/4 of a circle should be Pi/2 rather than 2*Pi. So at minimum, you would also need to re-write this line:
angle = PI * 0.5f * i / circle_points;
BDL's answer shows a more efficient approach to this. Though it draws an arc, which may or may not be what you want. Either way, you have enough code now to draw all three things in the diagram above.
The code you will see frequently using a cos() and sin() call for each point is correct, but very inefficient. Those are fairly expensive functions, and it's easy to write the code so that they are only needed once.
The idea is that you obtain each point from the previous point by rotating it by the angle increment. The rotation itself can be performed by a 2x2 transformation matrix. This reduced the calculation of each point to a few additions and multiplications.
The code will then look something like this:
// Calculate angle increment from point to point, and its cos/sin.
float angInc = 0.5f * PI / (circle_points - 1.0f);
float cosInc = cos(angInc);
float sinInc = sin(angInc);
// Start with vector (1.0f, 0.0f), ...
float xc = 1.0f;
float yc = 0.0f;
// ... and then rotate it by angInc for each point.
glBegin(GL_LINE_LOOP);
for (int i = 0; i < circle_points; i++) {
glVertex2f(0.5f + xc, 0.5f + yc);
float xcNew = cosInc * xc - sinInc * yc;
yc = sinInc * xc + cosInc * yc;
xc = xcNew;
}
glEnd();
As a subtle detail, note that if you want to draw a quarter circle with circle_points points, including the start and end point, you need to divide the angle range by circle_points - 1 to obtain the angle increment. It's the thing with the number of fence posts and number of gaps between them...
This will draw a circle segment. Andon already elaborated on the difference between a segment and a sector.
The above shared code with my own answer here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/25321141/3530129, which shows how to draw a circle with modern OpenGL.
When drawing a fraction of a circle, one needs to limit the angle in which the points should be placed. circle_points defines then in how many subparts this circle arc should be devided. In addition (and as pointed out by #Andon M. Coleman) using a GL_LINE_LOOP might not be the correct choice, since it will always close the line from the last to the first point.
You're code could be modified somehow like this:
glColor3f (0.25, 1.0, 0.25);
GLfloat angle, raioX=0.3f, raioY=0.3f;
GLfloat circle_points = 100;
GLfloat circle_angle = PI / 2.0f;
glBegin(GL_LINE_STRIP);
for (int i = 0; i <= circle_points; i++) {
GLfloat current_angle = circle_angle*i/circle_points;
glVertex2f(0.5+cos(current_angle)*raioX, 0.5+sin(current_angle)*raioY);
}
glEnd();
Related
I'm trying to draw a filled in circle, but when I draw this, it only shows in wireframe, here is the code I'm using to draw:
void render_circle(Vec2 position, float radius, Vec4 colour) {
glPolygonMode(GL_FRONT_AND_BACK, GL_FILL);
glColor4f(colour.x, colour.y, colour.z, colour.w);
glBegin(GL_LINE_LOOP);
int num_segments = 30; //#todo: make this scale for larger radius
for(int i = 0; i < num_segments; i++) {
float theta = 2.0f * math_pi * (float)i / (float)num_segments;
float x = radius * cosf(theta);
float y = radius * sinf(theta);
glVertex2f(position.x + x, position.y + y);
}
glEnd();
}
GL_LINE_LOOP is a line primitive type. If you want to draw a filled polygon, then you have to use a polygon primitive type. For instance GL_TRINAGLE_FAN.
It is only possible to correctly draw convex geometry. Concave polygons may not be represented correctly, by a primitive. A possibility to deal with this, is to split concave polygons into convex parts.
I have a function that draws a circle.
glBegin(GL_LINE_LOOP);
for(int i = 0; i < 20; i++)
{
float theta = 2.0f * 3.1415926f * float(i) / float(20);//get the current angle
float rad_x = ratio*(radius * cosf(theta));//calculate the x component
float rad_y = radius * sinf(theta);//calculate the y component
glVertex2f(x + rad_x, y + rad_y);//output vertex
}
glEnd();
This works dandy. I save the x, y and radius values in my object.
However when I try and draw a square with the following function call:
newSquare(id, red, green, blue, x, (x + radius), y, (y + radius));
I get the following image.
As you see, the square is nearly double as wide (looks more like the diameter). The following code is how I create my square box. As you can see it starts in the center of the circle in which it should. And should stretch out to the edge of the circle.
glBegin(GL_QUADS);
glVertex2f(x2, y2);
glVertex2f(x2, y1);
glVertex2f(x1, y1);
glVertex2f(x1, y2);
glEnd();
I can't seem to understand why this is!
If you're correcting the x-position for one object, you have to do it for all others as well.
However, if you continue this, you'll get into trouble very soon. In your case, only the width of objects is corrected but not their positions. You can solve all your problems by setting an orthographic projection matrix and you won't ever need to correct positions again. E.g. like so:
glMatrixMode(GL_PROJECTION); //switch to projection matrix
glOrtho(-ratio, ratio, -1, 1, -1, 1);
glMatrixMode(GL_MODELVIEW); //switch back to model view
where
ratio = windo width / window height
This constructs a coordinate system where the top edge has y=1, the bottom edge y=-1 and the left and right sides have x=-ratio and x=ratio, respectively.
I have defined 2 points on the surface of a sphere using spherical coordinates.
// define end point positions
float theta_point_1 = (5/10.0)*M_PI;
float phi_point_1 = (5/10.0)*2*M_PI;
float x_point_1 = Radius * sin(theta_point_1) * cos(phi_point_1);
float y_point_1 = Radius * sin(theta_point_1) * sin(phi_point_1);
float z_point_1 = Radius * cos(theta_point_1);
float theta_point_2 = (7/10.0)*M_PI;
float phi_point_2 = (1/10.0)*2*M_PI;
float x_point_2 = Radius * sin(theta_point_2) * cos(phi_point_2);
float y_point_2 = Radius * sin(theta_point_2) * sin(phi_point_2);
float z_point_2 = Radius * cos(theta_point_2);
// draw end points
void end_points ()
{
glColor3f (1.0, 1.0, 1.0);
glPointSize(25.0);
glBegin(GL_POINTS);
glVertex3f(x_point_1,y_point_1,z_point_1);
glVertex3f(x_point_2,y_point_2,z_point_2);
glEnd();
}
To step between the two points, I do the following:
find the difference between theta_points_1,2 and phi_points_1,2
divide the differences by 'n' (yielding 's')
redraw 'n' times, while stepping up the theta and phi by 's' each time
In the following, I've defined the differences between my theta and phi values, divided them, and then redraw them.
// begining spherical coords
float theta_point_1_value=5;
float phi_point_1_value=5;
// ending sperical coords
float theta_point_2_value=7;
float phi_point_2_value=1;
// dividing the difference evenly
float step_points=30;
float step_theta = 2/step_points;
float step_phi = 4/step_points;
// step between spherical coordinates
void stepping_points ()
{
glColor3f (1.0, 0.0, 0.0);
for (int i = 1; i < step_points; i++)
{
float theta = (theta_point_1_value/10.0)*M_PI;
float phi = (phi_point_1_value/10.0)*2*M_PI;
float x = Radius * sin(theta) * cos(phi);
float y = Radius * sin(theta) * sin(phi);
float z = Radius * cos(theta);
glPushMatrix();
glTranslatef(x,y,z);
glutSolidSphere (0.05,10,10);
glPopMatrix();
}
glEnd();
}
Now I understand, this displays 30 solid spheres at the same position. Because I have NOT included 'step_theta' or 'step_phi' in any of the redraws.
And that is the root of my question. How do I employ 'step_theta' and 'step_phi' in my redraws?
What I want to do is say something like this at the top of my 'for' loop:
for (int i = 1; i < step_points; i++)
{
float theta_point_1_value = (theta_point_1_value+step_theta);
float phi_point_1_value = (phi_point_1_value+step_phi);
float theta = (theta_point_1_value/10.0)*M_PI;
float phi = (phi_point_1_value/10.0)*2*M_PI;
float x = Radius * sin(theta) * cos(phi);
float y = Radius * sin(theta) * sin(phi);
float z = Radius * cos(theta);
glPushMatrix();
glTranslatef(x,y,z);
glutSolidSphere (0.05,10,10);
glPopMatrix();
}
The above will redraw 30 solid spheres, but they don't show between my defined end points. It's pretty clear that either my math or syntax is screwy (or more than likely, both are).
Hint: What is the range of your loop variable, i? What do you want the range of your step_theta and step_phi to be?
When you declare a variable inside the loop, it goes out of scope and is destructed after every iteration. As such, only the value of i changes between your loop iterations.
Also: Consider using a vector/point class. (x_point_1, y_point_1) is not C++ :).
If you want consistent timing regardless of frame rate, you need to track the passage of time and use that to control how far you interpolate between the two points. Remember the start time and calculate the desired end time, then each frame, calculate (float)(now-start)/(end-start). This will give you a value between 0.0 and 1.0. Multiply that value by the delta of each spherical coordinate and add their start angles and you'll get what angles you need to be at now.
When I first load my object I calculate the initial AABB with the maximum and minimum (x,y,z) points. But this is in object space and the object moves around the world and more importantly, rotates.
How do I recalculate the new AABB every time the object is translated/rotated? This happens basically in every frame. Is it going to be a very intensive operation to recalculate the new AABB every frame? If so, what would be the alternative?
I know AABBs will make my collision detection less accurate, but it's easier to implement the collision detection code than OBBs and I want to take this one step at a time.
Here's my current code after some insight from the answers below:
typedef struct sAxisAlignedBoundingBox {
Vector3D bounds[8];
Vector3D max, min;
} AxisAlignedBoundingBox;
void drawAxisAlignedBoundingBox(AxisAlignedBoundingBox box) {
glPushAttrib(GL_LIGHTING_BIT | GL_POLYGON_BIT);
glEnable(GL_COLOR_MATERIAL);
glDisable(GL_LIGHTING);
glColor3f(1.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f);
glBegin(GL_LINE_LOOP);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[0].x, box.bounds[0].y, box.bounds[0].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[1].x, box.bounds[1].y, box.bounds[1].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[2].x, box.bounds[2].y, box.bounds[2].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[3].x, box.bounds[3].y, box.bounds[3].z);
glEnd();
glBegin(GL_LINE_LOOP);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[4].x, box.bounds[4].y, box.bounds[4].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[5].x, box.bounds[5].y, box.bounds[5].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[6].x, box.bounds[6].y, box.bounds[6].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[7].x, box.bounds[7].y, box.bounds[7].z);
glEnd();
glBegin(GL_LINE_LOOP);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[0].x, box.bounds[0].y, box.bounds[0].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[5].x, box.bounds[5].y, box.bounds[5].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[6].x, box.bounds[6].y, box.bounds[6].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[1].x, box.bounds[1].y, box.bounds[1].z);
glEnd();
glBegin(GL_LINE_LOOP);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[4].x, box.bounds[4].y, box.bounds[4].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[7].x, box.bounds[7].y, box.bounds[7].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[2].x, box.bounds[2].y, box.bounds[2].z);
glVertex3f(box.bounds[3].x, box.bounds[3].y, box.bounds[3].z);
glEnd();
glPopAttrib();
}
void calculateAxisAlignedBoundingBox(GLMmodel *model, float matrix[16]) {
AxisAlignedBoundingBox box;
float dimensions[3];
// This will give me the absolute dimensions of the object
glmDimensions(model, dimensions);
// This calculates the max and min points in object space
box.max.x = dimensions[0] / 2.0f, box.min.x = -1.0f * box.max.x;
box.max.y = dimensions[1] / 2.0f, box.min.y = -1.0f * box.max.y;
box.max.z = dimensions[2] / 2.0f, box.min.z = -1.0f * box.max.z;
// These calculations are probably the culprit but I don't know what I'm doing wrong
box.max.x = matrix[0] * box.max.x + matrix[4] * box.max.y + matrix[8] * box.max.z + matrix[12];
box.max.y = matrix[1] * box.max.x + matrix[5] * box.max.y + matrix[9] * box.max.z + matrix[13];
box.max.z = matrix[2] * box.max.x + matrix[6] * box.max.y + matrix[10] * box.max.z + matrix[14];
box.min.x = matrix[0] * box.min.x + matrix[4] * box.min.y + matrix[8] * box.min.z + matrix[12];
box.min.y = matrix[1] * box.min.x + matrix[5] * box.min.y + matrix[9] * box.min.z + matrix[13];
box.min.z = matrix[2] * box.min.x + matrix[6] * box.min.y + matrix[10] * box.min.z + matrix[14];
/* NOTE: If I remove the above calculations and do something like this:
box.max = box.max + objPlayer.position;
box.min = box.min + objPlayer.position;
The bounding box will move correctly when I move the player, the same does not
happen with the calculations above. It makes sense and it's very simple to move
the box like this. The only problem is when I rotate the player, the box should
be adapted and increased/decreased in size to properly fit the object as a AABB.
*/
box.bounds[0] = Vector3D(box.max.x, box.max.y, box.min.z);
box.bounds[1] = Vector3D(box.min.x, box.max.y, box.min.z);
box.bounds[2] = Vector3D(box.min.x, box.min.y, box.min.z);
box.bounds[3] = Vector3D(box.max.x, box.min.y, box.min.z);
box.bounds[4] = Vector3D(box.max.x, box.min.y, box.max.z);
box.bounds[5] = Vector3D(box.max.x, box.max.y, box.max.z);
box.bounds[6] = Vector3D(box.min.x, box.max.y, box.max.z);
box.bounds[7] = Vector3D(box.min.x, box.min.y, box.max.z);
// This draw call is for testing porpuses only
drawAxisAlignedBoundingBox(box);
}
void drawObjectPlayer(void) {
static float mvMatrix[16];
if(SceneCamera.GetActiveCameraMode() == CAMERA_MODE_THIRD_PERSON) {
objPlayer.position = SceneCamera.GetPlayerPosition();
objPlayer.rotation = SceneCamera.GetRotationAngles();
objPlayer.position.y += -PLAYER_EYE_HEIGHT + 0.875f;
/* Only one of the two code blocks below should be active at the same time
Neither of them is working as expected. The bounding box doesn't is all
messed up with either code. */
// Attempt #1
glPushMatrix();
glTranslatef(objPlayer.position.x, objPlayer.position.y, objPlayer.position.z);
glRotatef(objPlayer.rotation.y + 180.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f);
glCallList(gameDisplayLists.player);
glGetFloatv(GL_MODELVIEW_MATRIX, mvMatrix);
glPopMatrix();
// Attempt #2
glPushMatrix();
glLoadIdentity();
glTranslatef(objPlayer.position.x, objPlayer.position.y, objPlayer.position.z);
glRotatef(objPlayer.rotation.y + 180.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f);
glGetFloatv(GL_MODELVIEW_MATRIX, mvMatrix);
glPopMatrix();
calculateAxisAlignedBoundingBox(objPlayer.model, mvMatrix);
}
}
But it doesn't work as it should... What I'm doing wrong?
Simply recompute the AABB of the transformed AABB. This means transforming 8 vertices (8 vertex - matrix multiplications) and 8 vertex-vertex comparisons.
So at initialisation, you compute your AABB in model space: for each x,y,z of each vertex of the model, you check against xmin, xmax, ymin, ymax, etc.
For each frame, you generate a new transformation matrix. In OpenGL this is done with glLoadIdentity followed by glTransform/Rotate/Scale (if using the old API). This is the Model Matrix, as lmmilewski said.
You compute this transformation matrix a second time (outside OpenGL, for instance using glm). You also can get OpenGL's resulting matrix using glGet.
You multiply each of your AABB's eight vertices by this matrix. Use glm for matrix-vector multiplication. You'll get your transformed AABB (in world space). It it most probably rotated (not axis-aligned anymore).
Now your algorithm probably only work with axis-aligned stuff, hence your question. So now you approximate the new bounding box of the transformed model by takinf the bounding box of the transformed bounding box:
For each x,y,z of each vertex of the new AABB, you check against xmin, xmax, ymin, ymax, etc. This gives you an world-space AABB that you can use in your clipping algorithm.
This is not optimal (AABB-wise). You'll get lots of empty space, but performance-wise, it's much much better that recomputing the AABB of the whole mesh.
As for the transformation matrix, in drawObjectPlayer:
gLLoadIdentity();
glTranslatef(objPlayer.position.x, objPlayer.position.y, objPlayer.position.z);
glRotatef(objPlayer.rotation.y + 180.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f);
glGetFloatv(GL_MODELVIEW_MATRIX, mvMatrix);
// Now you've got your OWN Model Matrix (don't trust the GL_MODELVIEW_MATRIX flag : this is a workaround, and I know what I'm doing ^^ )
gLLoadIdentity(); // Reset the matrix so that you won't make the transformations twice
gluLookAt( whatever you wrote here earlier )
glTranslatef(objPlayer.position.x, objPlayer.position.y, objPlayer.position.z);
glRotatef(objPlayer.rotation.y + 180.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f);
// Now OpenGL is happy, he's got his MODELVIEW matrix correct ( gluLookAt is the VIEW part; Translate/Rotate is the MODEL part
glCallList(gameDisplayLists.player); // Transformed correcty
I can't explain it further than that... as said in the comments, you had to do it twice. You wouldn't have these problems and ugly workarounds in OpenGL 3, btw, because you'd be fully responsible of your own matrices. Equivalent in OpenGL 2:
glm::mat4 ViewMatrix = glm::LookAt(...);
glm::mat4 ModelMatrix = glm::rotate() * glm::translate(...);
// Use ModelMatrix for whatever you want
glm::mat4 ModelViewMatrix = ViewMatrix * ModelMatrix;
glLoadMatrix4fv( &ModelViewMatrix[0][0] ); // In OpenGL 3 you would use an uniform instead
Much cleaner, right?
Yep, you can transform the eight corner vertices and do min/max on the results, but there is a faster way, as described by Jim Arvo from his chapter in Graphics Gems (1990).
Performance-wise, Arvo's method is roughly equivalent to two transforms instead of eight and basically goes as follows (this transforms box A into box B)
// Split the transform into a translation vector (T) and a 3x3 rotation (M).
B = zero-volume AABB at T
for each element (i,j) of M:
a = M[i][j] * A.min[j]
b = M[i][j] * A.max[j]
B.min[i] += a < b ? a : b
B.max[i] += a < b ? b : a
return B
One variation of Arvo's method uses center / extent representation rather than mix / max, which is described by Christer Ericson in Real-Time Collision Detection (photo).
Complete C code for Graphics Gems article can be found here.
To do that you have to loop over every vertex, calculate its position in the world (multiply by modelview) and find the minimum / maximum vertex coordinates within every object (just like when you compute it for the first time).
You can scale your AABB a bit, so that you don't have to recalculate it - it is enough to enlarge it by factor sqrt(2) - your rotated object then always fits in AABB.
There is also a question in which direction you rotate(?). If always in one then you can enlarge AABB only in that direction.
Optionally, you can use bounding spheres instead of AABBs. Then you don't care about rotation and scaling is not a problem.
To quote a previous response on AABB # Stack Overflow:
"Sadly yes, if your character rotates you need to recalculate your AABB . . .
Skurmedel
The respondent's suggestion, and mine, is to implement oriented bounding boxes once you have AABB working, and also to note you can make aabb's of portions of a mesh to fudge collision detection with greater accuracy than one enormous box for each object.
Why not use your GPU? Today I implimented a solution of this problem by rendening a couple of frames.
Temporary place your camera over the object, above it, pointing
down at the object.
Render only your object, with out lights or
anything.
Use orthographic projection too.
Then read the frame buffer. Rows and columns of black pixels means the model isn't there. Hit a white pixel - you hit one of the model AABB borders.
I know this isn't a solution for all the cases, but with some prior knowledge, this is very efficient.
For rendering off screen see here.
I want to know how to draw a spiral.
I wrote this code:
void RenderScene(void)
{
glClear(GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT);
GLfloat x,y,z = -50,angle;
glBegin(GL_POINTS);
for(angle = 0; angle < 360; angle += 1)
{
x = 50 * cos(angle);
y = 50 * sin(angle);
glVertex3f(x,y,z);
z+=1;
}
glEnd();
glutSwapBuffers();
}
If I don't include the z terms I get a perfect circle but when I include z, then I get 3 dots that's it. What might have happened?
I set the viewport using glviewport(0,0,w,h)
To include z should i do anything to set viewport in z direction?
You see points because you are drawing points with glBegin(GL_POINTS).
Try replacing it by glBegin(GL_LINE_STRIP).
NOTE: when you saw the circle you also drew only points, but drawn close enough to appear as a connected circle.
Also, you may have not setup the depth buffer to accept values in the range z = [-50, 310] that you use. These arguments should be provided as zNear and zFar clipping planes in your gluPerspective, glOrtho() or glFrustum() call.
NOTE: this would explain why with z value you only see a few points: the other points are clipped because they are outside the z-buffer range.
UPDATE AFTER YOU HAVE SHOWN YOUR CODE:
glOrtho(-100*aspectratio,100*aspectratio,-100,100,1,-1); would only allow z-values in the [-1, 1] range, which is why only the three points with z = -1, z = 0 and z = 1 will be drawn (thus 3 points).
Finally, you're probably viewing the spiral from the top, looking directly in the direction of the rotation axis. If you are not using a perspective projection (but an isometric one), the spiral will still show up as a circle. You might want to change your view with gluLookAt().
EXAMPLE OF SETTING UP PERSPECTIVE
The following code is taken from the excellent OpenGL tutorials by NeHe:
glViewport(0, 0, width, height);
glMatrixMode(GL_PROJECTION); // Select The Projection Matrix
glLoadIdentity(); // Reset The Projection Matrix
// Calculate The Aspect Ratio Of The Window
gluPerspective(45.0f,(GLfloat)width/(GLfloat)height,0.1f,100.0f);
glMatrixMode(GL_MODELVIEW); // Select The Modelview Matrix
glLoadIdentity(); // Reset The Modelview Matrix
Then, in your draw loop would look something like this:
glClear(GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT | GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT); // Clear The Screen And The Depth Buffer
glLoadIdentity();
glTranslatef(-1.5f,0.0f,-6.0f); // Move Left 1.5 Units And Into The Screen 6.0
glBegin(GL_TRIANGLES); // Drawing Using Triangles
glVertex3f( 0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f); // Top
glVertex3f(-1.0f,-1.0f, 0.0f); // Bottom Left
glVertex3f( 1.0f,-1.0f, 0.0f); // Bottom Right
glEnd();
Of course, you should alter this example code your needs.
catchmeifyoutry provides a perfectly capable method, but will not draw a spatially accurate 3D spiral, as any render call using a GL_LINE primitive type will rasterize to fixed pixel width. This means that as you change your perspective / view, the lines will not change width. In order to accomplish this, use a geometry shader in combination with GL_LINE_STRIP_ADJACENCY to create 3D geometry that can be rasterized like any other 3D geometry. (This does require that you use the post fixed-function pipeline however)
I recommended you to try catchmeifyoutry's method first as it will be much simpler. If you are not satisfied, try the method I described. You can use the following post as guidance:
http://prideout.net/blog/?tag=opengl-tron
Here is my Spiral function in C. The points are saved into a list which can be easily drawn by OpenGL (e.g. connect adjacent points in list with GL_LINES).
cx,cy ... spiral centre x and y coordinates
r ... max spiral radius
num_segments ... number of segments the spiral will have
SOME_LIST* UniformSpiralPoints(float cx, float cy, float r, int num_segments)
{
SOME_LIST *sl = newSomeList();
int i;
for(i = 0; i < num_segments; i++)
{
float theta = 2.0f * 3.1415926f * i / num_segments; //the current angle
float x = (r/num_segments)*i * cosf(theta); //the x component
float y = (r/num_segments)*i * sinf(theta); //the y component
//add (x + cx, y + cy) to list sl
}
return sl;
}
An example image with r = 1, num_segments = 1024:
P.S. There is difference in using cos(double) and cosf(float).
You use a float variable for a double function cos.