|
|
 | | Re: CW/CCW, vertex sequence, co-planar, convex, (115kB)
|
| Steve Bliss wrote in message <37f4edd7.8510607@lu...et.com>... (...) are (...) rotated (...) thinking. (...) Possibly. I'm not to great when it comes to expressing myself. I think if an even number of mirror operations are performed on a part, its (...) (25 years ago, 3-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: CW/CCW, vertex sequence, co-planar, convex, (115kB)
|
| (...) OIC now. I think. If an asymmetrical part is mirrored, it keeps the same shape, but is turned inside out. To get it right-side-out again, it must be re-mirrored. In other words, there's no way to produce left- and right-handed pairs of (...) (25 years ago, 3-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: CW/CCW, vertex sequence, co-planar, convex, (115kB)
|
| (...) Jacob: (...) Why? Having a negative determinate *should* turn subfiles inside-out. IMO. That's a useful function. Having programs checking determinates is not useful, and wastes rendering time. Steve (25 years ago, 3-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files
|
| (...) We're it. So to speak. Steve (25 years ago, 3-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files [DAT]
|
| (...) 578 is compliant because it contains *only* subfile references, which have been verified to not mess up (C)CW-ness. But that doesn't mean the *subfiles* are compliant. It also assumes the compliant subfiles are oriented the way the author (me) (...) (25 years ago, 3-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
|
