Subject:
|
Re: Line in the Sand
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 20 Oct 1999 20:56:06 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpieniazek@novera.comANTISPAM
|
Viewed:
|
1806 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote:
> I wouldn't describe the document as a formal specification.
I would. This is WAY better than most of the crap requirements I have to
rationalize into some semblance of something to keep paying customers
happy.
Very nice work, Steve. Written in a way that made it understandable to
someone that doesn't really know matrix math or rendering engine
internals (like me)...
I just have one suggestion...
> And there are one or two points of
> contention to be found, as well.
could you elaborate or identify these?
--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
NOTE: Soon to be lpieniazek@tsisoft.com :-)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Line in the Sand
|
| (...) Thanks. (blushing) Can that be translated into paying work? (...) That's because it's written by someone who keeps the matrix-math reference material very close at hand whenever he's got to actually go under the hood. (...) Issue 1: should the (...) (25 years ago, 21-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Line in the Sand
|
| OK, we've been discussing how to best extend the LDraw language to allow rendering engines to do backface-culling. We've got a pretty good agreement on most of what is needed. I think it would be productive, at this point, to work from a complete (...) (25 years ago, 20-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
85 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
|
|
|
|
