Subject:
|
Re: We should create a 973c01.dat
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Tue, 5 Nov 2002 02:30:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
816 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Erik Olson wrote:
> I was just studying the minifig hips shortcut and had a thought. Would it
> have been a good idea or not to use a subfile for the "studs" on minifig
> hips? The question is really what justifies a subfile?
Hmm. It might make sense to make a stud primitive for the minifig hips
studs. But probably not a subfile.
OTOH, there's only one part that uses the minifig-hip-stud. So a
primitive is not really justified.
> I'm slowly making my bounding box code smarter, and first teaching it that
> studs are meant to go inside other pieces, so minifig hips are a bit of a
> problem because they have no real studs.
Ah. Yes, I could see how that would be a problem.
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: We should create a 973c01.dat
|
| I was just studying the minifig hips shortcut and had a thought. Would it have been a good idea or not to use a subfile for the "studs" on minifig hips? The question is really what justifies a subfile? I'm slowly making my bounding box code smarter, (...) (22 years ago, 27-Oct-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
