Subject:
|
Re: New Primative 4-4ring1.dat (required for 972pa4.dat)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives
|
Date:
|
Fri, 14 Jun 2002 20:26:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2389 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, Steve Bliss writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, Orion Pobursky writes:
> > In lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, George Barnes writes:
> > > Here is the file based on Chris Dee's 1-4ring1.dat. This file is required
> > > for 973pa4.dat Adventurers Senor Palomar Torso.
> >
> > I think the new naming convention is ring1.dat.
>
> Actually, that's the old naming convention. Which is probably the reason
> George didn't notice the ring1.dat file. :)
>
> Steve
So what's the stance on old vs. new naming convention for the ring
primitives? (I realize there has already been some discussion on this, re:
<http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dat/parts/primitives/?n=235> , most likely other
places too)
Are we to support the legacy ringX.dat for the full rings that have already
been released; and for new rings, the 4-4ringX.dat format? Or will we
eventually move them all to the new 4-4ringX?
Just curious so I know how to correctly code quad2dat to handle the the full
rings to alleviate the problem George just ran across.
Thanks,
-Chris
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
7 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
