Message-ID: <35A692A4.A6743A4A@cue.satnet.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 17:16:06 -0500
From: "Ronald Patiņo G" <logan AT cue DOT satnet DOT net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "djgpp AT delorie DOT com" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: About ray casting and look up tables
References: <35A62FBB DOT AF821E92 AT cue DOT satnet DOT net> <35A65CC5 DOT 31645627 AT alcyone DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk



Erik Max Francis wrote:

> Ronald Patixo G wrote:
>
> > I don't understand why he uses this formula
> >
> > ang_rad = ang * TWOPIDIV360 ;
> > insted of the one i'm using
> >
> > and why he says that 1920 is  equivalent to 360
>
> It looks like he's simply using a different degree unit.  Instead of
> using units of 1 deg, like you are, he wants higher resolution and is
> using units of 360/1920 deg = 0.1875 deg.
>

Is the formula (unsing units of  360/1920 deg = 0.1875 deg)

radian = ang * ((2*PI)/1920) ;

equivalent to (using 1 deg)

radian = ang *(PI/180)

for converting from deg to rad

How can i find a relation between the trig fuctions calculated using
0.1875 deg and trig functions unsing 1 deg