 | | what's wrong with the POTM email?
|
|
I was intending to submit 61810.dat to the POTM contest (well, OK, little are my chances, probably, but you never know :) ) though I can't send the email: (...) I did double-check that I'm using the right email address, even sent it another time but (...) (15 years ago, 26-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: naming for some half-primitives
|
|
(...) I see. I shall use those, then. (15 years ago, 26-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: naming for some half-primitives
|
|
(...) Please just use the next available axlehoXX and npegholX numbers; axleho10.dat (thats one-zero not ell-zero), npeghol8.dat and npeghol9.dat. I want to sort out a better naming convention for these, but I don't want to hold up creativity. Chris (...) (15 years ago, 26-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | naming for some half-primitives
|
|
I've got a little little problem with primitives. I'm working on the 61808.dat file (I guess I'll do it with 61811.dat parallel...), and to ease it up and to save disk space the file will be in four quarters. So, to have such things, you inevitably (...) (15 years ago, 26-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Fixing the liftarms
|
|
(...) We are aware of this and do have a plan to rectify it. Steve and I went through this a while ago, with a view to distinguishing between beams and lift-arms and consistently naming the beams. I recall our thinking was that "liftarm" would (...) (15 years ago, 24-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
