From 253e360062a74cbaf87c7f9dc30ef26bca1697eb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nat Goodspeed Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 16:36:16 -0400 Subject: DRTVWR-476: Mention LLApp::stepFrame() in LLAppViewer::idle() which performs "by hand" the same sequence of calls found in stepFrame(). Why not simply call stepFrame()? Hysterical reasons? --- indra/newview/llappviewer.cpp | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/indra/newview/llappviewer.cpp b/indra/newview/llappviewer.cpp index db2db43ee1..1bba17dc29 100644 --- a/indra/newview/llappviewer.cpp +++ b/indra/newview/llappviewer.cpp @@ -4610,6 +4610,9 @@ void LLAppViewer::idle() LLFrameTimer::updateFrameTime(); LLFrameTimer::updateFrameCount(); LLEventTimer::updateClass(); + // LLApp::stepFrame() performs the above three calls plus mRunner.run(). + // Not sure why we don't call stepFrame() here, except that LLRunner seems + // completely redundant with LLEventTimer. LLNotificationsUI::LLToast::updateClass(); LLSmoothInterpolation::updateInterpolants(); LLMortician::updateClass(); -- cgit v1.2.3