 | | Re: New Part: x192.dat - Minifig Shield Round
|
|
(...) It's a weakness of the posting method (the file came in via email). I believe the line-wrapping was performed by Willy's email software. I recommend that all DAT content be posted via LUGNET's web interface, to avoid this line-wrapping issue. (...) (23 years ago, 3-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What about BFC-ing studs? (was: Two questions on primitives)
|
|
(...) Sorry, I got distracted. I'll get back to BFC'ing and submitting those primitives. [snip] (...) You're working on an incorrect assumption here. Reflecting a subfile (ie, negating the multipliers for one dimension) will not invert the subfile. (...) (23 years ago, 3-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New Part: x192.dat - Minifig Shield Round
|
|
When I downloaded this part, I can see that Lugnet's DAT download truncated the lines to 80 characters. This totally mangled the part. Is this a weakness of the Lugnet interface, or is it enforcing a standard? In other words, are part file lines (...) (23 years ago, 2-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | What about BFC-ing studs? (was: Two questions on primitives)
|
|
(...) Okay... if this is the case, then what's the status on bringing the less-primitive primitives into BFC certification? Take studs for example. Studs strike me as a great candidate for getting BFC'd because of the potentially huge payoff. Of (...) (23 years ago, 2-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Hi-res sphere?
|
|
(...) Sorry about the delayed response, but I was on vacation. I'll take a look at my sphere generation code as well and at the very least determine the difficulty of adding type 5 lines. I don't think it will be very difficult to do, but I haven't (...) (23 years ago, 31-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
