 | | Re: CW/CCW, vertex sequence, co-planar, convex, (115kB)
|
|
Jacob: (...) Steve: (...) Jacob: (...) It happens every once in awhile. Actually, which approach *would* be better? Examining the transformation matrix to determine the state of inversion, and adjusting the CW/CCW setting to correct for it, would (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Interpreting the proposed FACE meta-command
|
|
(...) Recognizing multiple forms of the command shouldn't add much to rendering. Each file can be parsed once, and then the post-parsing results cached, for later re-reference. The FACE meta-command would be stored as an opcode and a single (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files [DAT]
|
|
(...) Forgot the footnote: 1- There's an interesting distinction between 'valid' and 'well-formed' contructions. LDraw will allow line-breaks as whitespace in commands, so: 1 16 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3001.dat is valid, but it's not well-formed. (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Comprehensive meta-command list
|
|
Steve: (...) Yes. (...) Yes. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL:(URL) -- ---...--- (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Track names (was Re: To Tore Eriksson)
|
|
(...) I'm curious Chris, in what sets was that the case ? And do these gray ones have those "negative" tapered ends, just like the old blue track had ? In lugnet.cad.dev, Larry Pieniazek writes: (...) Gimme a set number for "the wildwest miningish" (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Comprehensive meta-command list
|
|
(...) Yes, they do. In the example above, the first meta-command, 0 TRANSLATE 20 0 0, would persist until the end of the file. (...) I think I know the answer to this question, but just to be sure: is the 0 INVERT meta-command transparent to (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: CW/CCW, vertex sequence, co-planar, convex, (115kB)
|
|
(...) I've been thinking the exact opposite -- mirroring should be a valid method for turning subfiles inside-out, and the software doesn't need to do anything special to deal with it (except to notice the inversion, and pass that info on to the (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Interpreting the proposed FACE meta-command
|
|
(...) Why not recognize it all ways: 0 FACE ACW 0 FACE ANTICLOCKWISE 0 FACE CCW 0 FACE CLOCKWISE 0 FACE COUNTERCLOCKWISE 0 FACE CW 0 FACE DOUBLESIDED 0 FACE DS 0 FACE UNKNOWN This adds a bit to the parser, but not so much. The recommended standard (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files
|
|
(...) No (like Gary said). Two reasons: 1. The 0 FACE directive would be an operative switch, not a global setting. This is convenient, but it is also necessary in some cases. Most importantly, it would allow the 0 FACE meta-statement to appear (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files
|
|
(...) That's what we're doing now--figuring out what the standard should be. Both the function and the syntax. But "standard" is an odd term in this case. In my mind the LDraw standard is defined as "code which is recognized and interpreted by (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
