Subject:
|
Re: Why aren't LDRAW tools Open Source?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Thu, 15 Apr 2004 19:02:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1281 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Don Heyse wrote:
> > It also helps to advertise. This page makes no mention of the
> > sourceforge project with the source code.
> > http://www.kclague.net/LSynth/index.htm
> > How do you expect people to find it?
>
> I expect people to ask me.
Then you should suggest that on the web page, or in the book.
People forget what they discussed on lugnet after a week or so.
[snip: many, many lsynth features. It's time for me to buy the book]
> > PS. We just picked up a spybot and it comes with hoses and fiber
> > optics, so who knows, maybe we'll discover an lsynth need real soon
> > now...
>
> When trying to produce professional level building instructions that
> match LEGO and have a reliable and easy to use process to get them,
> LSynth is the easiest and most flexible tool available.
>
> Thanks for writing an alternate LSynth GUI. I didn't want to write
> one but Syngress insisted.
>
> As we speak, I'm finishing up complete support for LSynth in LPub so
> that the synthesized files (much larger file size) are only
> temporary byproducts of the overall rendering process.
>
> Michael is also working LSynth support for MLCad.
>
> The biggest single issue with LPub is its horrible inefficiency with
> respect to file size. The synthesized files can be really huge. By
> adding an angular resolution control, LSynth should be able to merge
> many of the spline points into one single scaled hose cross section
> segment.
That sounds good, but will lsynthcp still be a separate program? I
still want to create an LDDP style plugin wrapper for lsynthcp so it
can be incorporated into both LDDP and ldglite, allowing you to
preview synthesized parts without having to run them through POV.
If I remember, I fiddled with some changes to lsynthcp to make this
easier, but we all got tied up in a discussion over command line
options vs meta-command changes that never got resolved.
http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/?n=8250
Someone mentioned getopt and everyone seemed to like it but me, because
I'd already started working with the original meta-command syntax.
Did that getopt syntax stuff ever go anywhere, or was that just a red
herring?
Anyhow, I suppose I could just check the changes into CVS and see if
anyone notices. ;^)
Don
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Why aren't LDRAW tools Open Source?
|
| In lugnet.cad, Don Heyse wrote: <snip> (...) a library sort of thing, like Lars taught me about L3P. (...) I don't like the getopt format because it is so different than standard issue meta-commands. (...) Well, I have to get hooked in and put in a (...) (20 years ago, 16-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why aren't LDRAW tools Open Source?
|
| In lugnet.cad, Don Heyse wrote: <snip> (...) I expect people to ask me. (...) LSynth is an all in one synthesizer in that it does hose and band type synthesis, and it is stand alone, and the synthesis process does not involve manual copying of stuff (...) (20 years ago, 15-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
48 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
