To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.devOpen lugnet.cad.dev in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Development / 2993
2992  |  2994
Special: 
[DAT] (requires LDraw-compatible viewer)
Subject: 
Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.dev
Date: 
Sun, 3 Oct 1999 02:46:43 GMT
Viewed: 
812 times
  
On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 14:15:02 GMT, "Gary Williams" <graywolf@pcpros.net>
wrote:

My LDraw folder has seven DAT files with '0 CW*', none with '0 CCW*', and 30
with '0 not CW*'.

The seven '0 CW*' files are:

...
PARTS\578.DAT

Note that 578.DAT contains a suspicious comment :)

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) expected them: cylinders' surfaces facing
outward, disc facing upward.

The part about not knowing whether it's CW or CCW means I don't know if the
primitives are CW or CCW.

Here's the code:

0 CW-compliant (well, maybe CCW-compliant -- I haven't checked)

1 16 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 4-4edge.dat
1 16 0 80 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 4-4edge.dat
1 16 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 4-4disc.dat
1 16 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 80 0 0 0 4 4-4cyli.dat
1 16 0 80 0 4 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 4 4-4disc.dat

Dote that on the last line, the disc is mirrored on Y to turn it upside
down.

Steve



Message has 1 Reply:
  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)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files
 
Michael Lachmann wrote in message ... (...) I retract my earlier suggestion. I'd prefer to test for '0 CW-compliant' than '0 CW*' because checking for an exact string match is usually easier. Not supporting wildcards also promotes consistency. (...) (25 years ago, 2-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

56 Messages in This Thread:
















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR