 | | Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files
|
|
(...) Neither do I, but I also know how hard it is to visually check a part for errors. (...) How does that work? Is it based on what the majority of the rays deterimine? I probably need to re-read some of the messages in this thread, to get a (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New Group Idea
|
|
OK, so my minifig-scale models of Barbie and Tux the Penguin have nowhere to go? -gyug (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Comprehensive meta-command list
|
|
There will be support added for "0 INCLUDE filename.dat" in the next release, which will insert the text from filename.dat into the current file. This differs from a type 1 line, since the scope stack is not pushed and popped. For example, "0 COLOUR (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Comprehensive meta-command list
|
|
Gary Williams wrote in message ... (...) No, never needed, since "0 INVERT" is a toggle! (...) Since INVERT is directly related to the CW and CCW parameters of the FACE meta-command, why not let it be yet another parameter to FACE ? I think the (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files
|
|
(...) You need to have someone to check the parts, take a look at the picture at (URL) (from 105.DAT), there's a missing face and the program won't be able to handle that. There are other parts like that, just start checking and you'll see. Leonardo (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Interpreting the proposed FACE meta-command
|
|
Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote in message ... (...) I was just trying to be consistent...:) I'd be just as happy if they were all spelled-out. But I'd like to avoid supporting both abbreviations and the complete spelling. Every additional test that (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Interpreting the proposed FACE meta-command
|
|
Gary Williams: (...) Very sensible (now that Steve has convinced me). (...) Hmm. I don't like it, but we have already abbreviated (counter)clockwise, so it does make sense to abbreviate double-sided too. :-( Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Interpreting the proposed FACE meta-command
|
|
Michael Lachmann wrote in message ... (...) Here's my take on the matter. The meta-command: 0 FACE <CW|CCW|DS|UNKNOWN> ...should only be used to indicate the order of the vertices of the polygons _in the file that contains it_. If A.dat has a '0 (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files
|
|
Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote in message ... (...) also (...) but (...) the (...) an (...) Is this the standard now, or at least could we make it the standard ???? Mike (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote in message <37f6c258.270062819@...et.com>... (...) 30 (...) Does that mean if a program would find the CW directive it can assume that every-thing in this file is compliant? E.g. the program would not have to test if possible (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
