 | | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Thanks for clearing this up, Joshua. (...) How about the other suggestions made by Fredrik and me? ('... and myself'? I never was good at grammar) (...) What about the full-width beams with cross-axle holes in the ends? Are those liftarms or (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Yes, they are bricks, but they are commonly called 'beams'. (...) Good point. I don't see the open center bricks being called beams. (...) If that was the only anomolous part, I'd be willing to label it a beam. I yield to your superior counter (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW crash
|
|
(...) That is a known problem with LEdit. Jacob, thanks for adding this to the FAQ. (...) I'm not sure of your exact meaning here, so I'm answering both possible meanings: Yes, if you want to *edit* your part in LEdit, you will need to break it up. (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) IMHO we should try to describe parts as genericly (sp?) as possible regardless of the obvious or how LEGO has used it in any particular set(s). There's always some imaginative builder who can use a part in a way nobody thought of before. Let's (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) It comes from this: (URL) from the 1x4 and 1x3 versions, the term expanded. I've been using the term almost as long as James did, if not longer, because of those set names. It IS a term that came from TLG (TLC), but not necessarily from the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts / Beams & bricks
|
|
(...) This is very interesting! In the light of this information, I would suggest that the non-liftarms in the liftarm part category get renamed to "beam", "beam angular/angled" and "halfbeam", respectively. The parts that are liftarms can still be (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts / Beams & bricks
|
|
My two euro-cents... In Ultimate Builder set (3800), Lego provides an inventory with names... might be a source of inspiration ? - Technic bricks with holes are refered as "Technic bricks" - smooth bricks as "Beams", angled ones as "Technic angular (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) I suspected that, but I wasn't sure. (...) :-) Yes. (...) Correct. (...) The very same thing. Jacob (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW crash [DAT]
|
|
(...) Hi Jacob, I Think you are 100 percent right. First of all, it wasn't LDRAW that crashed, but it was LEDIT. Sorry abouth that :-( I guess i found the problem causing LEDIT to crach. Perhaps this is alreddy known by other people, but it seems to (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P user primitive substitution
|
|
(...) A: I like it. -Chuck (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Great, I was mostly just testing the grounds. I wouldn't actually vote for a solution like this. (...) While this idea would unify many elements, I don't think it's a good one. After all, the technic bricks with holes or axleholes (or pins!) (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
I think the parts that go in the Round category should be more for just locating things that you would first think of as round, such as dishes and cones. For example, pieces like these (...) I would not first think of as round. Regarding your list, (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
I've put together a list of possible candidates for the new Round category, and how I think they should sort out. I've included three groups of parts: 'Put in Round', 'Not Sure' and 'Probably Not', to match how I feel about them. I excluded parts I (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) The third machine with the monitor is immaterial. The opengl driver runs on the machine where the ldglite executable is running. Based on your use of a remote display, I'm going to assume you're probably running linux (and most likely a Mesa (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I agree with that. (...) After thorough research (I googled 'liftarm', and found mostly legofan sites), I've come to the conclusion that 'liftarm' was made up by somebody, and is only used to describe Lego elements. I'm guessing that either (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) My personal opinion is that the liftarm category in LDraw is way too wide. I'm not quite sure myself what a "liftarm" actually is in the English language. But my understanding from LEGO is that a liftarm is a rod or a beam with a cross axle (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) What do you mean by "using the Mesa driver"? In both cases the example was rendered directly on the monitor of a third (Intel based) machine over the network. Jacob (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P user primitive substitution
|
|
(...) C! But it does not seem completely unacceptable to me. Play well, Jacob (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I agree. Let's hope we can agree on a priority! (...) I thought both these would fit OK into the "liftarm" category, as that's how they'd generally be used. ROSCO (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) the OSMesa driver on ldraw.org. Its reproducible with just two stud3.dats or even just two 4-4disc4.dats. And it only seems to happen when lighting is enabled and and antialiased edgelines are on, even if you don't have any edgelines. I wonder (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
(...) Probably not. I can run L3Lab under Linux using Wine, but that is on an i686 based computer, not Alpha. Fredrik (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I think this sounds like a sensible approach! (...) You mean something like 2637 Technic Axle 16 with Axleholes 2739 Technic Axle 6 with Ball Joint Sockets I am a bit ambivalent about this. The rods in question are axle shaped, however they (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P user primitive substitution
|
|
Since there hasn't been discussion of this topic, and more than two weeks have elapsed, can we assume that: A) The proposed revision is acceptable B) The proposed revision is un-acceptable C) No one knows LMKWYT, Steve (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I agree totally. A very important point. I'm ambivalent about the resolution. My *first* reaction is that we should leave existing parts mostly alone, unless it is very clear that they should be moved. My second reaction is that I'll go along (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
(...) But I seem to remember that L3Lab does not work on Alpha machines (running Linux). Jacob (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
(...) I should be able to work out a part of the command line arguments from that, but I am so lazy, that I actually would like LDGLite to print it as: Arguments: -a0.821417,-0.129189...4,0.710583 -q -j or whatever the status - including projection, (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) Yes. It is - as I wrote - the cylinders inside the bricks that have the colour of the preceding part. The following is the picture I get, when I render the example with the command `ldglite -q -ms -l3 -s4 -a1,0,1,-0.5,-1,0.5,1,0,-1 (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
(...) I think it spews the information needed for A if you turn on debugging with the -g switch. eg. Transform current: Translation: 0 0 0 Matrix: 0.821417 -0.129189 0.555497 0.417763 0.799364 -0.431845 -0.388257 0.586794 0.710583 Actually, I think (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) Are you sure it's using the fixed part on the Alpha? Perhaps there is a copy of the old bad part on the search path before the fixed copy. You could check this by using the ledit mode to step through the part to make sure it loaded the correct (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
(...) L3Lab can do this (in the statistics menu), and I would certainly like to see this feature in LDGLite as well! Fredrik (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
I have been playing a bit around with the interactive rotation mode in LDGLite to find a good angle on my cargo aircraft. I think I have found it now, but how can I get LDGLite to print the parameters as a: a) complete set of command line arguments (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Good point. I support that change. (...) Jacob (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) Same example, but a different problem. :-) (...) :-) No. It was Steve's publishing of a fresh parts release that got me started looking through my old bug reports. For some reason I hit "q" while looking at the example from my old bug report, (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) This is a good and important point. If the category "round" is to take the same functionality as, say, the "slope" category, it would be more correct to rename existing parts into Round Plate 2 x 2 Round Brick 2 x 2 and so on. After all, slope (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Excellent idea. (...) Not bad. What do we do about <part:4032> (Plate 2 x 2 Round)? Is "plate" or "round" most important? I presume that we should stick to the current name and add "round" as an extra category. A similar question concerns (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Yes. I'm guessing (based on past experience) that it won't be the next parts update (2002-01), but maybe the one after that (2001-02). But who knows? If we get three part reviewers who decide to work together to change the part names and post (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote: 8< [snip] (...) I think it is a "well-rounded" idea. It would make the lists easier to search (esp. for newbies). Similarly, Franklin Cain had suggested a year ago reworking the Castle and Space categories. Will that be happening (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW crash
|
|
(...) Yep, acording to the help file, 216 is marked as "general protection error" (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW crash
|
|
"Jacob Sparre Andersen" <sparre@nbi.dk> skrev i meddelandet news:3C33000C.485A91...@nbi.dk... (...) Both Delphi 2 and 5 (Borland Pascal) reports 216 as 'Access violation'. Probably the old Borland Pascal for DOS that James used for LDRAW uses the (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BricksWest 2002 Registration Re-Opens
|
|
(...) I'm glad I wasn't the only one - although it looks like I finished 5.5 hours earlier than you. Steve (23 years ago, 2-Jan-02, to lugnet.events.brickswest, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
