 | | Re: When Did Tiles Get Their Groove?
|
|
(...) I am fairly sure none of the printed tiles had the fingernail grooves. The grooves have been there for a long time; probably over 20 years old I would say. I think that the use of printing on tiles is significantly more recent. I have a few (...) (23 years ago, 20-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: When Did Tiles Get Their Groove?
|
|
(...) Below is the list of part files which could potentially be affected by this change. So far, we've only got grooved versions of the 1x1, 1x2, 1x2 grille, and 1x4 tile part files. At least the 2x2 and 2x2 round tiles could also be regrooved, and (...) (23 years ago, 20-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | When Did Tiles Get Their Groove?
|
|
[FUT lugnet.cad.dev] Do any of you oldtimers remember exactly when the bases of the various tile parts changed, to have the groove/indent around the edge? Were all the tiles changed at once, or did it take a while for everything to get into the (...) (23 years ago, 20-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Part Development Request
|
|
I hope I am submitting this request the correct way. If not, please let me know how I should be. I am hoping (with fingers crossed) that someone might be willing to make this part: (URL) is a small Technic style steering wheel: - Height: 1 plate + 1 (...) (23 years ago, 19-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Various Questions . . .
|
|
(...) That's ok. We were all new once. (...) That's not uncommon. There are a lot of parts that are not made yet. (...) For right now, you can make a request here. Sooner or later, we'll have a part-request system on the ldraw.org website, as a (...) (23 years ago, 19-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P user primitive substitution
|
|
(...) [snip] (...) [snap] (...) Nod, right. INCLUDE has been mentioned before, in other contexts, and I'm generally in favor of it. But I'd rather discuss that in a separate thread - IF[N]DEF/ELSE/ENDIF wouldn't depend on INCLUDE. (although, for (...) (23 years ago, 19-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P user primitive substitution
|
|
(...) Well yes, but I wasn't just thinking about POV. I thought that was your point in changing the syntax. The 0 INCLUDE meta-command could be used to install custom colors much like the ldliterc.dat file. I'm sure there are plenty of other non-POV (...) (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Various Questions . . .
|
|
Okay I'm new to the whole LDraw thing so bear with me. I'm trying to model one of my creations and I've discovered two of the parts are not available. First of all, what is the process to get a part made? Can I produce a part myself and what (...) (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P user primitive substitution
|
|
(...) In general, that's an interesting thought. But in this case, I don't think it's necessary - POV already has an include statement (IIRC). Of course, allowing the use of such a statement raises another issue: is it alright to distribute (...) (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P user primitive substitution
|
|
(...) Just a thought. If the POVRAY (or whatever) sections get too big, would it make sense to add 0 INCLUDE meta-command so the LDRAW only programs don't waste time parsing? Then the POV specific versions could be distributed separately from the (...) (23 years ago, 17-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
