Subject:
|
Re: Instead of ~Moved to
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:44:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
14296 times
|
| |
|
|
Tore Eriksson wrote:
> Yes, I know my suggested approach has its obvious downsides. But the
> current system really makes me Yike!, too.
>
> When do we reach the point where the downsides of the current system
> overturn the advantages? I think we've already passed that threshold.
> And even if you don't agree with me now, I'm sure we'll get there
> soon the way things are going right now.
I think there is some part of your equation that we don't
realize/understand?
I can view all my LDRAW models without any updating, thanks to the "moved
to" concept. The models doesn't become obsolete even though the part numbers
are updated.
But the "moved to" concept *does* create an extra level of indirection,
which might slow down large renders (one extra file, one extra transform),
especially if there are primitives involved.
I honestly don't see how your suggestion would make the total situation
better, but you're welcome to mail me in Swedish if you want to explain
without having to think in English.
--
Anders Isaksson
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Instead of ~Moved to
|
| (...) Yes, I know my suggested approach has its obvious downsides. But the current system really makes me Yike!, too. When do we reach the point where the downsides of the current system overturn the advantages? I think we've already passed that (...) (14 years ago, 20-Jan-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
18 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
