 | | Re: Parts Releases and the CA
|
|
44.dat should be 32126.dat (part 44 is a "moved to" file) Can whomever next updates the list correct this (18 years ago, 13-Sep-06, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Releases and the CA
|
|
(...) The following parts have been rewritten (total 7) parts 4181p06.dat parts 4181p07.dat parts 4182p06.dat parts 4182p07.dat parts 75.dat parts 76.dat parts 77.dat The following parts are still needing to be rewritten (total 91) p 4-4con0.dat p (...) (18 years ago, 13-Sep-06, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | New parts header format validated by the LSC
|
|
The LDraw Standards Committee (LSC) has validated a suitable LDraw parts header format proposed by the library admins to implement the Contributor Agreement (CA). This was necessary in order to update the LDraw parts library to use the new CA, and (...) (18 years ago, 11-Sep-06, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX) !
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Releases and the CA
|
|
(...) Here is the list of files in the official library, whose original author has not affirmed the CA. I have not reviewed all of these for comments that indicate they might already have had a complete re-write. Some files are already on the Parts (...) (18 years ago, 11-Sep-06, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Releases and the CA
|
|
(...) chris is working on the list. stay tuned. w. (18 years ago, 10-Sep-06, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Releases and the CA
|
|
(...) I may have missed this, but has LDraw.org released a list of the parts that need to be replaced? I would think that making such a list available and encouraging part authors to focus their efforts on those parts first would speed things up and (...) (18 years ago, 9-Sep-06, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Maximum depth of ldraw models?
|
|
(...) I found that performance went down somewhat when I copied and pre-translated all the studs too. I could be creating a memory cache penalty. Anyway it is only one matrix multiply per stud (stud is already flattened in itself), which goes onto (...) (18 years ago, 9-Sep-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Maximum depth of ldraw models?
|
|
The thread seems to be splitting from the original point, It is a fact that OpenGL generally places a depth of 16 on any transforms. If an LDRAW model in MPD format was presented to OpenGL as a raw data block I suspect that OpenGL would easily hit (...) (18 years ago, 8-Sep-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Maximum depth of ldraw models?
|
|
(...) Actually on modern cards strips are always slower than optmized lists. You can always try adding degenerate triangles to stitch strips together to save the cost of multiple render calls (too bad PC cards don't support a primitive reset index). (...) (18 years ago, 8-Sep-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Maximum depth of ldraw models?
|
|
(...) Well, typically the multiplies that occur for different studs have the same rotation and scaling aspects, the only thing different is the position. So instead of repeating the multiplication on the original matrix, if the top left 3x3 values (...) (18 years ago, 7-Sep-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
