I am learning to code. I am using Unity and C#, and I am finding some difficulties trying to create and populate multiple array though a for loop.
In other languages you could do something like this:
for (int j = 0; j <= 3; j++)
{
scenes[j] = new float[2] {test[j], test2[j] };
}
But apparently I cannot do something similar in C#. Is that right?
How should I do then?
I need something that create something like this:
scenes1 = {x1, y1}
scenes2 = {x2, y2}
and so on...
Multi dimensional arrays may give you a solution to the problem, all of you data may go into a single array, in your case you may use structure like scenes['index or position', 'test', 'test2'], I am not well versed in C# (unfortunately) but you can see more here. Hope this helps.
Basing on your answers in comments I still don't understand what exactly you need. AFAIU you have two pieces of data: scenes and heights; and you want to generate permutations of compound (scene, height) elements. I assume that you either need:
Generate a random list of all possible permuations exactly once
Generate a long (possibly infinite) stream of random different permuations
So here is some code that might help.
First let's define some boilerplate:
public class Scene
{
public readonly string Something;
public Scene(string something)
{
Something = something;
}
// something else
}
public struct CompoundSceneData
{
public readonly Scene Scene;
public readonly float Height;
public CompoundSceneData(Scene scene, float height)
{
Scene = scene;
Height = height;
}
}
Of course your Scene class is most probably more complicated. CompoundSceneData is a struct representing single item of scene + height.
#1 Generate a random list of all possible permuations exactly once:
// Fisher–Yates shuffle of indices 0..size
int[] GenerateRandomIndicesPermutation(int size)
{
int[] permutation = Enumerable.Range(0, size).ToArray();
Random rnd = new Random();
for (int cur = size; cur >= 2; cur--)
{
int swapPos = rnd.Next(cur);
int tmp = permutation[swapPos];
permutation[swapPos] = permutation[cur - 1];
permutation[cur - 1] = tmp;
}
return permutation;
}
List<CompoundSceneData> GenerateAllRandomPermutationsOnce(Scene[] scenes, float[] heights)
{
int scenesCount = scenes.Length;
int heightsCount = heights.Length;
int totalCount = scenesCount * heightsCount;
List<CompoundSceneData> permutations = new List<CompoundSceneData>(totalCount);
foreach (var compoundIndex in GenerateRandomIndicesPermutation(totalCount))
{
int sceneIndex = compoundIndex % scenesCount;
int heightIndex = compoundIndex / scenesCount;
permutations.Add(new CompoundSceneData(scenes[sceneIndex], heights[heightIndex]));
}
return permutations;
}
void TestUsageAllOnce()
{
Scene[] scenes = new Scene[] { new Scene("Scene #1"), new Scene("Scene #2") };
float[] heights = new float[] { 0.1f, 0.2f, 0.3f };
// this is effectively endless loop
foreach (CompoundSceneData sceneData in GenerateAllRandomPermutationsOnce(scenes, heights))
{
// will be called excactly 2*3 = 6 times
DrawScene(sceneData);
}
}
There are a few key ideas there:
If we have N scenes and M heights there will be NM permutations and given a number in range [0, NM-1] you can select a pair. For example, 2*N + 5 means 5-th scene + 2-nd height (in 0-based indices(!)).
Thus if we want to generate a sequence of different pairs of N scenes and M heights, it is enough to generate a random permuation of numbers [0, N*M-1] and use it as sequence of indices
There is a well known Fisher–Yates shuffle algorithm to create a random permutation.
#2 Generate an infinite stream of random different permuations:
IEnumerable<CompoundSceneData> GenerateInfiniteRandomStream(Scene[] scenes, float[] heights)
{
Random rnd = new Random();
while (true)
{
int sceneIndex = rnd.Next(scenes.Length);
int heightIndex = rnd.Next(heights.Length);
yield return new CompoundSceneData(scenes[sceneIndex], heights[heightIndex]);
}
}
void TestUsageInfinite()
{
Scene[] scenes = new Scene[] { new Scene("Scene #1"), new Scene("Scene #2") };
float[] heights = new float[] { 0.1f, 0.2f, 0.3f };
// this is effectively endless loop
foreach (CompoundSceneData sceneData in GenerateInfiniteRandomStream(scenes, heights))
{
DrawScene(sceneData);
// this is the only thing that will stop the loop
if (IsEndOfGame)
break;
}
}
void TestUsageInfinite2()
{
Scene[] scenes = new Scene[] { new Scene("Scene #1"), new Scene("Scene #2") };
float[] heights = new float[] { 0.1f, 0.2f, 0.3f };
List<CompoundSceneData> fixedSizeList = GenerateInfiniteRandomStream(scenes, heights).Take(100).ToList();
foreach (CompoundSceneData sceneData in fixedSizeList)
{
// this will be called 100 times (as specified in Take)
DrawScene(sceneData);
}
}
The only interesting thing here is a usage of a C# feature yield return. This feature allows creating streams of data (IEnumerable) from code that looks sequential.
Note that for the solution #2 there is no guarantee that each combination (scene+data) will occur only once per (N*M) items. It just generates random combinations that will have good statistical properties only in long run. It is possible to achieve this guarantee as well but it significantly complicates the code and probably the user will not notice anyway.
Related
How do I restrict one random prefab to be used only once but placed randomly with a bunch of prefabs of arrays on top of other object?
using System.Collections.Generic;
using UnityEngine;
public class LevelRoomsScript : MonoBehaviour
{
[SerializeField]
private GameObject[] memberWoodArray = null;
[SerializeField]
private GameObject[] memberRoomPrefabArray = null;
void Start()
{
foreach (GameObject localWood in memberWoodArray)
{
int localNumRoomPrefab = memberRoomPrefabArray.Length;
int localRoomIndex = Random.Range(0, localNumRoomPrefab);
GameObject localRoomPrefab = memberRoomPrefabArray[localRoomIndex];
Instantiate(localRoomPrefab, localWood.transform.position, Quaternion.identity);
}
}
}
The way I understand your question is that you want to instantiate each element in memberRoomPrefabArray at most once.
You could create a temporary list that is a copy of memberRoomPrefabArray and remove each element that is instantiated before the next loop cycle.
void Start()
{
List<GameObject> temp = new List<GameObject>(memberRoomPrefabArray);
foreach (GameObject localWood in memberWoodArray)
{
int localRoomIndex = Random.Range(0, temp.Count);
Instantiate(temp[localRoomIndex], localWood.transform.position, Quaternion.identity);
temp.RemoveAt(localRoomIndex);
}
}
You might want to add some checks like if (temp.Count == 0) { break; } if it's possible for memberRoomPrefabArray to be shorter than memberWoodArray.
Edit: Changed Random.Range(0, temp.Count - 1) to Random.Range(0, temp.Count) since, apparently, it's only maximally inclusive with floats and not integers.
You rather want to "shuffle" the array once and then iterate the shuffled array e.g. using Linq OrderBy and using Random.value as order like
using System.Linq;
...
void Start()
{
if(memberRoomPrefabArray.Length < memberWoodArray.Length)
{
Debug.LogError($"Not enough prefabs available for {memberWoodArray.Length} unique spawns!", this);
return;
}
// as the method names suggest this will be a randomized array of the available prefabs
var shuffledPrefabs = memberRoomPrefabArray.OrderBy(m => Random.value).ToArray();
for (var i = 0; i < memberWoodArray.Length; i++)
{
// Since the array is already shuffled we can now go by consecutive order
Instantiate(suffledPrefabs[i], memberWoodArray[i].transform.position, Quaternion.identity);
}
}
I am writing a chemical molecule editor for Windows. As it has to be used in a Word Add-In I am restricted to using WPF for rendering structures. This is working quite well, apart from one tiny niggling point.
I use GlyphRuns for rendering atom labels and they are always displaced slightly to the right. If you look on the screenshot you can see there is a leading whitespace, especially with the H2N, and Hg atom labels. Why? The white background is what you get when you get the outline geometry of the glyph run.
The GlyphRun class is so badly documented that I cannot see which of the properties to amend to precisely locate the text where I want it. So any suggestions to try would be welcome.
UPDATE: I've been asked to provide a sample. The code is complex, but not gratuitously so, so I'm cutting it down to focus on the essentials:
public void MeasureAtCenter(Point center)
{
GlyphInfo = GlyphUtils.GetGlyphsAndInfo(Text, PixelsPerDip, out GlyphRun groupGlyphRun, center, _glyphTypeface, TypeSize);
//compensate the main offset vector for any descenders
Vector mainOffset = GlyphUtils.GetOffsetVector(groupGlyphRun, AtomShape.SymbolSize) + new Vector(0.0, -MaxBaselineOffset) + new Vector(-FirstBearing(groupGlyphRun), 0.0);
TextRun = groupGlyphRun;
TextMetrics = new AtomTextMetrics
{
BoundingBox = groupGlyphRun.GetBoundingBox(center + mainOffset),
Geocenter = center,
TotalBoundingBox = groupGlyphRun.GetBoundingBox(center + mainOffset),
OffsetVector = mainOffset
};
}
public static GlyphInfo GetGlyphs(string symbolText, GlyphTypeface glyphTypeFace, double size)
{
ushort[] glyphIndexes = new ushort[symbolText.Length];
double[] advanceWidths = new double[symbolText.Length];
double[] uprightBaselineOffsets = new double[symbolText.Length];
double totalWidth = 0;
for (int n = 0; n < symbolText.Length; n++)
{
ushort glyphIndex = glyphTypeFace.CharacterToGlyphMap[symbolText[n]];
glyphIndexes[n] = glyphIndex;
double width = glyphTypeFace.AdvanceWidths[glyphIndex] * size;
advanceWidths[n] = width;
double ubo = glyphTypeFace.DistancesFromHorizontalBaselineToBlackBoxBottom[glyphIndex] * size;
uprightBaselineOffsets[n] = ubo;
totalWidth += width;
}
return new GlyphInfo { AdvanceWidths = advanceWidths, Indexes = glyphIndexes, Width = totalWidth, UprightBaselineOffsets = uprightBaselineOffsets };
}
public static GlyphUtils.GlyphInfo GetGlyphsAndInfo(string symbolText, float pixelsPerDip, out GlyphRun hydrogenGlyphRun, Point point, GlyphTypeface glyphTypeFace, double symbolSize)
{
//measure the H atom first
var glyphInfo = GlyphUtils.GetGlyphs(symbolText, glyphTypeFace, symbolSize);
hydrogenGlyphRun = GlyphUtils.GetGlyphRun(glyphInfo, glyphTypeFace,
symbolSize, pixelsPerDip, point);
//work out exactly how much we should offset from the center to get to the bottom left
return glyphInfo;
}
public static Vector GetOffsetVector(GlyphRun glyphRun, double symbolSize)
{
Rect rect = glyphRun.ComputeInkBoundingBox();
//Vector offset = (rect.BottomLeft - rect.TopRight) / 2;
Vector offset = new Vector(-rect.Width / 2, glyphRun.GlyphTypeface.CapsHeight * symbolSize / 2);
return offset;
}
Indeed the GlyphRun class is a lot of work to use. I would suggest working with FormattedText objects instead. If there are performance issues, you can consider converting the FormattedText to Geometry once and reusing that. The MSDN docs provide a comparison of the different approaches.
Hey everyone so I have been at this for awhile now and I'm trying to figure out the best way to go about this. So I have an array of Movie Clip Objects calledouterPlanets and they are added to an array called aPlanetArray so these planets in the array are added to the stage and have spacing between them all. When the Player touches the screen the character jumps on another planet and the planets scroll down on the +y axis to keep the character positioned to the center.
I add 10 planets to the stage because for performance Issues I don't want to add a lot and lose FPS so my idea was when the array is getting low such as the planet array is <= 5 then add more planets to the top position of the last last planet. Hope I am making sense. Think of it like a stack of blocks the blocks fall down one by one and more is added to the top of them as more fall down so its never ending.
Here is how I add them to the stage:
//Instantiate Arrays
aPlanetArray = new Array();
//Numbers
xSpacing = 100;
ySpacing = 200;
startPoint = new Point((stage.stageWidth / 2), (stage.stageHeight / 2) );
addOuterPlanets();
private function addOuterPlanets():void
{
for (var i:int = 0; i < nPlanets; i++)
{
outerPlanets = new mcOuterPlanets();
outerPlanets.x = startPoint.x + (xSpacing * i);
outerPlanets.y = startPoint.y - (ySpacing * i);
stage.addChild(outerPlanets);
aPlanetArray.push(outerPlanets);
}
}
The only thing I can come up with at the moment is this:
if (aPlanetArray.length <= 5)
{
addOuterPlanets();
}
This adds a new set of planets but of course just adds them to the center of the stage and not on top of the other planets. Any idea how to accomplish this?
Current Progress:
private function collisionPlanetHandler():void
{
for (var i:int = 0; i < aPlanetArray.length; i++)
{
var currentPlanet:mcOuterPlanets = aPlanetArray[i];
planetContainer.addChild(aPlanetArray[i]);
if (character.hitTestObject(currentPlanet) && !nextlevel)
{
trace("HIT");
yDown = (stage.stageHeight / 2) - (currentPlanet.y - 200); //have object tween to center of stage or where was last positioned
//tap back to false
tap = false;
nextlevel = true;
if (!bNullObject) // have null object so doesnt loop again and cause error for planet == null
{
planet.destroy();
planet = null;
}
bNullObject = true;
planetHit = currentPlanet; // to land on correct planet
aPlanetArray.splice(i, 1);
randomRotation = randomNumber(1, 2); //Stop in random rotation for next planet
TweenLite.to(planetContainer, 2.0, { y:yDown, ease:Elastic.easeOut } );
planetIncrement -= 300;
addPlanet(randomNumber((stage.stageWidth/2) - 220, ((stage.stageWidth/2)) + 220), planetIncrement);
}
}
}
example code
function gameSetup():void{
setupUsers();
loadSounds();
createLevel(_level1);
addInitialPlanets();
addCharacter();
}
private function addInitialPlanets():void{
for (var i:int = 0; i < nPlanets; i++){
addPlanet(startPoint.x + xSpacing * i, startPoint.y + ySpacing * i);
}
}
private function addPlanet(xPos:Number, yPos:Number):void{
p = new mcOuterPlanets();
// var p:mcOuterPlanets = new mcOuterPlanets(); // this is preferred method
p.x = xPos;
p.y = yPos;
stage.addChild(p);
// addChild(p); // this is preferred method
aPlanetArray.push(p);
}
Now when you need to add another planet above the others do
addPlanet(xPos, yPos);
// where xPos is desired X and yPos is desired y
You see what is happening here? I'm positioning the planet by using a separate function. You can offload other tasks related to add a planet as well. Imagine something like this:
addPlanet(xPos, yPos, color, size, speed, ringCount);
Get the idea?
Also you'll want to remove the planets that are far below the player to prevent slowdown. Or you could simply move the ones far below up to the top to recycle them instead of creating new planets all the time.
Draft example...
#Nathan , Neal Davis is right as usual, but I'd push the Vector, then addChild at its current index... Avoid the Arrays if You can. (if the instances are made by the same Class).
var aPlanetArray:<Vector>.MovieClip = new <Vector>.MovieClip(10);
// or new <Vector>.MovieClip(); if You don't want to restrict the amount of items in the Vector.
// or new <Vector>.McOuterPlanets() if McOuterPlanets is a Class.
private function addOuterPlanets():void {
for (var i:int = 0; i < nPlanets; i++){
aPlanetArray.push(new mcOuterPlanets());
aPlanetArray[i].x = startPoint.x + (xSpacing * i);
aPlanetArray[i].y = startPoint.y - (ySpacing * i);
addChild(aPlanetArray[i]);
};
[EDIT]
If you choose to make a Vector of MovieClip (var aPlanetArray:<Vector>.MovieClip = new <Vector>.MovieClip(10)),
You must use aPlanetArray[i] as McOuterPlanets to get the methods of
Your McOuterPlanets methods!
So, in the case of a Vector of MovieClip (aPlanetArray == .MovieClip), if You want to use the methods of McOuterPlanets methods You have to do :
var outerP : McOuterPlanets = aPlanetArray[someIndex] as McOuterPlanets;.
Then You may call outerP.someMethodOfMcOuterPlanets();
Just because McOuterPlanets extends the MovieClip Class.
Never use Vectors if You have to add different types of datas in Your Vector, use the Array Class instead.
This will works but this is tricky an total nonsense!
Example :
var vectorOfStrings:Vector.<String> = Vector.<String>([["a","b","c"],["d","e","f"]]);
// this works and Your Vector contains only Strings so OK.
trace("");
trace("length of the Vector = " + vectorOfStrings.length);
trace("vectorOfStrings.toString() = " + vectorOfStrings.toString());
trace("vectorOfStrings[0] = " + vectorOfStrings[0]);
trace("vectorOfStrings[1] = " + vectorOfStrings[1]);
var vectorOfArrays:Vector.<Array> = Vector.<Array>([["a","b","c"],[1,2,3]]);
// this works but this is tricky an total nonsense
// use the Array Class instead!
trace("\n NEVER DO THIS! Use the Array Class instead!");
trace(" NONSENSE!");
trace("length of the Vector = " + vectorOfArrays.length);
trace("vectorOfArrays.toString() = " + vectorOfArrays.toString());
trace("vectorOfArrays[0] = " + vectorOfArrays[0]);
trace("vectorOfArrays[1] = " + vectorOfArrays[1]);
[/EDIT]
I hope this may help.
Check to the reference for :
ActionScript 3 fundamentals: Arrays
ActionScript 3 fundamentals: Associative arrays, maps, and dictionaries
ActionScript 3 fundamentals: Vectors and ByteArrays
I do not know how to add the john array and make a hittestobject with it.
Bal is a different class non relevant to this problem.
I've tried to do john[new Bal]
tried john[ k ]
tried z and to specify z as a for-loop but then i would just get Z balls place.
This is supposed to become a space-invader type of game. I'm trying to make a hit test object between HENK and the 'falling balls' (JOHN). I do not know how to work with arrays especially given the fact that is should be timer-triggered.
Thanks
public class Main extends Sprite
{
public var henk:Sprite = new Sprite();
public var level:Timer = new Timer (2000, 0);
public var valTijd:Number = new Number
public var i:Number = 2000;
public var john:Array = new Array();
public var k:Number = 9000;
public function Main():void
{
henk.graphics.beginFill(0xFF00FF);
henk.graphics.drawCircle(0, 500, 20);
henk.graphics.endFill();
addChild(henk);
level.addEventListener(TimerEvent.TIMER, up);
level.start();
henk.addEventListener(Event.ENTER_FRAME, muis);
henk.addEventListener(Event.ENTER_FRAME, hit);
}
public function up(e:TimerEvent):void
{
var tijdje:Timer = new Timer( i, 0)
tijdje.addEventListener(TimerEvent.TIMER, tijdLuisteraar);
tijdje.start();
i = i - 250;
}
public function muis (e:Event):void
{
henk.x = mouseX;
}
public function hit (e:Event): void
{
if ( henk.hitTestObject(john [k] ))
{
if (contains(john[k] ))
{
removeChild(henk);
}
}
}
public function tijdLuisteraar(e:TimerEvent):void
{
john.push(new Bal);
addChild(john[k]);
}
}
}
welcome to stackoverflow!
This problem is actually fairly simple, I will describe how you will probably want to use an array in the case you described.
At the part where you create new Balls you want to append them to an array, which will be something like the following:
var ball = new Bal();
john.push(ball);
addChild(ball);
This will go inside your timer-triggered function, obviously.
Secondly, you want to have a hitTestObject with henk and all of the balls stored in the john array.
for(var i = 0; i < john.length; i++) {
if (henk.hitTestObject(john[i])) {
// well, that's a bummer for your player, henk hit one of the balls in the john array
// display something like a message here
}
}
This will automatically detect the size of the array, so all elements are tested. Be careful with hitTestObject when you have a lot of elements in the john-array, this can slow down your game drastically.
Furthermore, reflecting your code I suggest the following:
remove public var i:Number = 2000; and public var k:Number = 9000;, these have no meaning anymore
use a mouse event to move your henk object, not an ENTER_FRAME. I guess you will be able to find how this works. This will only trigger the function when it has to do something, resulting in less CPU-power needed and a cleaner code.
if you want to make the game even cooler, you could add the support for using the arrow keys
I have a method that is gobbling up 25% of my cpu time. I call this method about 27,000 times per second. (Yup, lots of calls since it's updating frequently). I am wondering if anybody knows a faster way to detect if 2 polygons overlap. Basically, I have to check the moving objects on the screen against stationary objects on the screen. I am using PathGeometry and the two calls below are using up 25% of the cpu time used by my program. The PointCollection objects I am passing just contain 4 points representing 4 corners of a polygon. They may not create a rectangular area, but all the points are connected. I guess a trapazoid would be the shape.
These methods are short and were very easy to implement, but I think I might want to opt for a more complicated solution if I can have it run more quickly than the code below. Any ideas?
public static bool PointCollectionsOverlap(PointCollection area1, PointCollection area2)
{
PathGeometry pathGeometry1 = GetPathGeometry(area1);
PathGeometry pathGeometry2 = GetPathGeometry(area2);
return pathGeometry1.FillContainsWithDetail(pathGeometry2) != IntersectionDetail.Empty;
}
public static PathGeometry GetPathGeometry(PointCollection polygonCorners)
{
List<PathSegment> pathSegments = new List<PathSegment>
{ new PolyLineSegment(polygonCorners, true) };
PathGeometry pathGeometry = new PathGeometry();
pathGeometry.Figures.Add(new PathFigure(polygonCorners[0], pathSegments, true));
return pathGeometry;
}
Ok, after lots of research and finding many partial answers, but none that fully answered the question, I have found a faster way and it is actually about 4.6 times faster than the old way.
I created a special test app to test the speed this. You can find the test app here. If you download it, you can see a checkbox at the top of the app. Check and uncheck it to switch back and forth between the old way and the new way. The app generates a bunch of random polygons and the borders of the polygons change to white when they intersect another polygon. The numbers to the left of the 'Redraw' button are to allow you to enter the Number of Polygons, Max Length of a side, and Max offset from square (to make them less square and more odd shaped). Push 'Refresh' to clear and regenerate new polygons with the settings you've entered.
Anyway, here is the code for the two different implementations. You pass in a collection of the points that make up each polygon. The old way uses less code, but is 4.6 times slower than the new way.
Oh, one quick note. The new way has a couple calls to 'PointIsInsidePolygon'. These were necessary because without it, the method returned false when one polygon was entirely contained within a different polygon. But the PointIsInsidePolygon method fixes that problem.
Hope this all helps somebody else out with polygon intercepts and overlaps.
Old Way (4.6 times slower. YES REALLY 4.6 TIMES slower):
public static bool PointCollectionsOverlap_Slow(PointCollection area1, PointCollection area2)
{
PathGeometry pathGeometry1 = GetPathGeometry(area1);
PathGeometry pathGeometry2 = GetPathGeometry(area2);
bool result = pathGeometry1.FillContainsWithDetail(pathGeometry2) != IntersectionDetail.Empty;
return result;
}
public static PathGeometry GetPathGeometry(PointCollection polygonCorners)
{
List<PathSegment> pathSegments = new List<PathSegment> { new PolyLineSegment(polygonCorners, true) };
PathGeometry pathGeometry = new PathGeometry();
pathGeometry.Figures.Add(new PathFigure(polygonCorners[0], pathSegments, true));
return pathGeometry;
}
New Way (4.6 times faster. YES REALLY 4.6 TIMES faster):
public static bool PointCollectionsOverlap_Fast(PointCollection area1, PointCollection area2)
{
for (int i = 0; i < area1.Count; i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < area2.Count; j++)
{
if (lineSegmentsIntersect(area1[i], area1[(i + 1) % area1.Count], area2[j], area2[(j + 1) % area2.Count]))
{
return true;
}
}
}
if (PointCollectionContainsPoint(area1, area2[0]) ||
PointCollectionContainsPoint(area2, area1[0]))
{
return true;
}
return false;
}
public static bool PointCollectionContainsPoint(PointCollection area, Point point)
{
Point start = new Point(-100, -100);
int intersections = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < area.Count; i++)
{
if (lineSegmentsIntersect(area[i], area[(i + 1) % area.Count], start, point))
{
intersections++;
}
}
return (intersections % 2) == 1;
}
private static double determinant(Vector vector1, Vector vector2)
{
return vector1.X * vector2.Y - vector1.Y * vector2.X;
}
private static bool lineSegmentsIntersect(Point _segment1_Start, Point _segment1_End, Point _segment2_Start, Point _segment2_End)
{
double det = determinant(_segment1_End - _segment1_Start, _segment2_Start - _segment2_End);
double t = determinant(_segment2_Start - _segment1_Start, _segment2_Start - _segment2_End) / det;
double u = determinant(_segment1_End - _segment1_Start, _segment2_Start - _segment1_Start) / det;
return (t >= 0) && (u >= 0) && (t <= 1) && (u <= 1);
}