 | | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) I don't think they should. Parts authors are (probably) motivated by their interest for the LDraw format, so I would expect a few to handle the BFC-compliance of their parts. But to demand that everybody do this would probably exclude far to (...) (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Performance Improvement
|
|
Rui Martins <Rui.Martins@link.pt> wrote in message news:Pine.GSU.4.10.1...0@is-sv... (...) and (...) point (...) I don't see a problem with doing this for the 4-4disc, but it would be a problem for the 2-4disc. The 2-4disc is often used in (...) (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Performance Improvement
|
|
Oops ! wrong links. (...) Should be HTTP://is-sv.link.pt.../nstud.png (...) Should be HTTP://is-sv.link.pt.../xstud.png (...) Also I forget to mention that this reduces the number of triangles by 2 (for each stud) isn't that great ? See ya Rui (...) (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Performance Improvement
|
|
Since the BFC discussion has everything to do with performance improvement, I would like to propose the following changes to the primitives: - 4-4disc.dat - 2-4disc.dat Remove the point which lies in position (0,0,0), because it's NOT required and (...) (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) I'd like to have all parts compliant by making a second copy of the primitives that can't be inverted instead of using "0 INVERSE" commands. Leonardo (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) I believe that it's possible to create a program that automatically fixes the orientation of a part. Take a look at this picture: (URL) The red faces are the back faces and the green faces are the front faces. The image on the left is the part (...) (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Rui Manuel Silva Martins writes: <SNIP> (...) until (...) <SNIP> This is not true: Since the renderer has to assume a certain state for his models. The thing (at least in MLCad) works as follows: If BFC is on than the model is (...) (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) Completly agree, but part authors should strive to (if possible) present the parts for voiting already BFC compliant. But it's NOT a requirement. This reasoning also favours the "non branch BFC dependence", even authors which don't supply BFC (...) (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) This is common to both every approach I have seen, obviously ! (...) Nope! No imediate benefits, because with the parent dependence restrictions, you have to have an entire branch compliant to be able to do BFC, which includes the root,i.e. (...) (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:7cjkescmg077t76...4ax.com... (...) into (...) IMHO, no. If a mostly automated cleanup tool can be devised, then a few of us could clean up new parts after they are voted in and before (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
