Additional labeling and clarifying of Goddard code, particularly renderer.c
#487
+128
−224
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This pull request renames many Goddard functions and variables to be more descriptive. A few functions and variables do not have a discernible function, as they are only used as part of incomplete, unused functions. While I could have left these as-is, I took the liberty of giving them names anyway, if only for improving the human readability of the code. I have also added more
UNUSED
tags where appropriate. Lastly, some comments were left explaining the functionality of previously undocumented functions, at least where I felt reasonably confident I understood what the function was doing.No changes to the behavior of the Goddard code have been made. In the case of
gd_dl_rot_matrix
(previouslyfunc_8019F2C4
), minor changes to how the function uses its arguments have been made for the sake of clarity.gd_dl_rot_matrix
is only called during a specific switch statement in thedraw_shape
function indraw_objects.c
. Previously, the values 120, 121, and 122 were passed to represent the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. Confusingly, 120 was then subtracted from this passed value in the function, meaning that it was essentially passing 0, 1, and 2 with extra steps. This change should have no effect on the behavior of the program.This is by no means a comprehensive PR. Hopefully, further labeling will follow.