 | | LETGUI update
|
|
Hi all, I have updated LETGUI to support the latest tools created by Philo ((URL) and (URL) can find the latest version of LETGUI at (URL) is a complete install for windows systems with all tools in one installer. For Linux user I have now also (...) (15 years ago, 25-May-10, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: LDForge - dev. plans and call for help
|
|
(...) If you want a visual example on stipple, look at my LD4DStudio, it uses it for transparent stuff. In combination with depth buffer you don't need to sort anything just push the triangles and/or quad cords using glDrawElements and optionally (...) (15 years ago, 1-Apr-10, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDForge - dev. plans
|
|
(...) Ah, thank you Travis! I got depth buffering working now. :) No more problems with polygon sorting.. -Santeri (15 years ago, 1-Apr-10, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDForge - dev. plans and call for help
|
|
(...) In order for GL_DEPTH_TEST to work, you have to clear the depth buffer at the same time you clear the rest of the screen: glClearDepth(1.0); glClearColor(0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0); glClear(GLCOLORBUFFERBIT GLDEPTHBUFFERBIT); (Note: the (...) (15 years ago, 31-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDForge - dev. plans and call for help
|
|
(...) For transparency, LDView sorts triangles, and only triangles, not parts. So the centroid of each triangle is (p1 + p2 + p3) * (1/3). All transparent geometry in the whole model goes into one big list of triangles. While I'm at it, I calculate (...) (15 years ago, 31-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Developing LDBoxer Again
|
|
(...) Thanks, Tim! Along with a couple of bug fixes, support for the two other categories is now implemented. Right now, I'm creating the studless parts for the \B folder. Without them, LDBoxer would still not be able to boxer them. /Tore (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Developing LDBoxer Again
|
|
(...) --snip-- (...) This sounds like an excellent development. I had to hand alter some of my Boxer'd MOCs to get the bottom detailing back in. And I think I forgot some. Tim (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | LDBoxer Available at SourceForge
|
|
(...) I've played around a little with my old LDBoxer program. The new version auto-boxes a lot more safe-to-box parts than previous versions. Added support for parts without studs and parts without bottom details (URL) Replace button is made (...) (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Developing LDBoxer Again
|
|
After seven years of thinking and hesitating, I have decided to improve my utility progam LDBoxer. There are lots of room for improvements, but to begin with, I will fix a couple of bugs I have discovered. Then I will focus on making two new (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: number notation in official parts
|
|
(...) Yes, and no, or rather, maybe. In Delphi you would do something like Write(Format('%g', [Value])); i.e more or less the same format strings as in C. But, it is type-safe at runtime :-) (15 years ago, 12-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: number notation in official parts
|
|
(...) Thanks for the info. I've always used perl scripts to convert oddly formatted data to a consistent format and then read it like that. Nice to know I don't always have to. If it could only read some of the more bizarre Fortran formats I'd never (...) (15 years ago, 12-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: number notation in official parts
|
|
(...) All float specifiers (e, E, f, g, G) are treated identically by the scanf functions. When scanning floats, they always recognize all float formats. One other thing about %g on output is that it automatically strips trailing zeros, which %f (...) (15 years ago, 12-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: number notation in official parts
|
|
(...) Ahhh. I'd never heard of %g before now. I'm so used to %f and %e it had never occured to me that there might be a mixed option. Handy to know as I suspect it would be helpful in reading files of unknown format. I'm sure Delphi has some hideous (...) (15 years ago, 12-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: number notation in official parts
|
|
(...) Actually, in C, %g does exactly this. Having said that, I think LDDP is a Delphi app, so it uses Pascal, and I don't remember how Pascal does formatting. --Travis (15 years ago, 12-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: number notation in official parts
|
|
(...) I definitely know this. I see them far too much in my job as a numerical physicist ;) My point is that to write in mixed format (some %f and others %e) requires some strange coding unless there is a weird language which does it automatically. (...) (15 years ago, 12-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: number notation in official parts
|
|
(...) Hmm, I thought I killed that "feature". I'll look into it as I find time to finish up LDDP 2.1 -Orion (15 years ago, 11-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: number notation in official parts
|
|
(...) I mostly agree with this policy. (...) There is nothing strange in the routines, it is the standard format used to represent very large or very small numbers in a limited number of digits. Actually since values never get very large in LDraw (...) (15 years ago, 11-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: number notation in official parts
|
|
(...) My suggestion would be to read numbers in that notation but never write them. I'm not sure why LDDP would write them that way (it would require some strange output routines) but if one thing writes them then it's best to read them. Tim (15 years ago, 11-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: number notation in official parts
|
|
(...) I think it should be forbidden in official files as the benefit is very small and it is not good human readable. Benefit would be smaller filesize, as 0.0004 (6 characters) has more characters than 4E-4 (4 characters). Against could be 0.4 (3 (...) (15 years ago, 10-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: number notation in official parts
|
|
(...) Such notation is not noted in any specs.. neither allowed or forbidden. At least, I can't find such. Maybe we should bring this up at LSC at some point? (FWIW I sent this in yesterday but it seems the server ate the message.. resending it) (...) (15 years ago, 9-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
