|
|
 | | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
| (...) Maybe it's better to call the Groups instead of Clusters. The file names would be less confusing that way. /Tore (22 years ago, 21-Oct-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
| (...) Hey, thanks for thinking of me! At present, I believe the only "official unofficial" stud primitives for the clone.dat project are studc.dat and stud2cl.dat. I'll have to double-check the studc2z.dat, though. In the interest of diplomacy and (...) (22 years ago, 21-Oct-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
| (...) I thought of 4x4, too. First I rejected the idea as I thought it would only save 15 lines in a file but then I realized that it can be used more than once in a file. I can't find any other sombinations that I would like to have. Maybe, maybe a (...) (22 years ago, 20-Oct-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
| (...) In principle this sounds OK to me, but I would want to be somewhat restrictive about how many new files we have - 4x4, 6x6, 8x8 sound good combinations. What others? Regarding a naming convention, though, do we know how all renderers recognise (...) (22 years ago, 20-Oct-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | "Clusters" of Studs?
|
| Inspired by parts\s\4186a.dat, I would like to see "clusters" of studs, say 6 x 6 and 8 x 8. That would make a lot of part files *much* smaller. Maybe we could call them Stud36.dat and Stud64.dat? /Tore (22 years ago, 18-Oct-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
|
