 | | Re: New Primitive Class
|
| (...) When Steve and I were working on the format for the torii, I believe we said we would deal with this issue when it arose. Now it has. (...) The spreadsheet I made to create p/16 and p/48 torii also included support for this occurance. (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | | | Re: New Primitive Class
|
| (...) I'm not terribly surprised. This is a great solution, as then, if for some reason in the future, inverse ratio tori are needed, they can use the same convention, just a different starting letter and inverting the ratio as appropriate in the (...) (24 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | | | Re: New Primitive Class
|
| (...) You might be surprised at how close t04o9999.dat would come. I can't see that it's any worse than the current t04o3333.dat file. Actually, I think I'm going to modify LDView to recognize nnnn in the minor fraction (where n is 0-9) to be (...) (24 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | | | New Primitive Class
|
| Actually, it's not a new primitive, but it doesn't fit under the current naming scheme. My current 33089 (in PT) is a rather bulky file (55KB), so to streamline it, I decided to make a few new primitives. One of these was a torus with major radius 1 (...) (24 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | | | Re: BFC problem with s/3070bs01.dat?
|
| (...) I think I agree with that. Actually, I could go either way. (...) Right. (...) I'm opposed to allowing additional comments between INVERTNEXT and the statements it affects -- one program's 'comment' is another program's 'meta-statement'. OTOH, (...) (24 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
|
