 | | Re: The geometry of minifigs
|
|
(...) Thanks. Can I safely assume that the author used 10 degrees when modeling the part? BTW: This is just what I find unuserfriendly about the parts library: You had to reverse engineer the part to find the angle. I'm sure the information I asked (...) (25 years ago, 6-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) the (...) therefor (...) I would suggest to make the meta-commands for the renderer as simple as possible and move all other corrections to external programs or functions. I believe that what we have of BFC in MLCad for example is good enough (...) (25 years ago, 6-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
OK. I've thought about most of John's posting, and I think I'm ready to make an intelligible response. Just to be sure I caught everything, here's a (hopefully quick) re-iteration. The major differences between John's proposal and the proposal I (...) (25 years ago, 6-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) What would you suggest simplifying or removing? (...) How do you mean? What is a 'bad definition' in a matrix? Having a negative determinant? And what do you have to do to correct it? My understanding was that the rendering program could (...) (25 years ago, 6-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) That's not always possible, as has been discussed. And is still being discussed... (...) Yeah, that's a possibility. (...) OK, but that's a complication for the rendering engine. It would have to check the actual path of each file, after the (...) (25 years ago, 6-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) Good point. We definitely *should* muddy this discussion up with some real facts. ;) (...) Yes and no. Something that's easy to do is definitely less of a 'requirement' than something that's a lot of work. But it's still a requirement, placed (...) (25 years ago, 6-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:4qbnescr7hii5bq...4ax.com... (...) I hope it doesn't cause indigestion :-) -John Van (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:v96neskqugbi18b...4ax.com... (...) use to (...) object (it (...) faces (...) choose (...) in some (...) required to (...) the (...) You make a very good point here, Steve (especially (...) (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
I need to digest this. I'll respond tomorrow. Steve (...) (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Performance Improvement
|
|
Rui, I think that it's better to keep the 4-4disc and 2-4disc files the way they are. The current configuration is more flexible, requires fewer special-size primitives, and is less likely to be mis-applied. The new proposal would only provide a (...) (25 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
