 | | 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)
|
