Subject:
|
Re: Use of box.dat primitive
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 21 Nov 2002 13:28:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
302 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Manfred Moolhuysen writes:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm a bit concerned about several parts submitted to the Parts Tracker that
> use the box.dat primitive (the one with all faces and edges present), where
> other primitives would have been more appropriate. It seems to me that in
> several of these cases box.dat has been attempted to use as a 'no
> hassle/quick fix' solution.
>
> With friendly greetings, M. Moolhuysen.
Forgive me, for I have sinned.
You are absolutely correct. It has been too easy to just use the box.dat
instead of experimenting with the other ones, not knowing if they go from -1
to 1 or just from 0 to 1 and in what axises. And, of course, what faces and
what lines will be omitted...
/Tore
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Use of box.dat primitive
|
| (...) Then I invite you to take a look at the new primitives reference (URL) let me know if you feel this needs to have more information. Chris (22 years ago, 21-Nov-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Use of box.dat primitive
|
| Hello all, I'm a bit concerned about several parts submitted to the Parts Tracker that use the box.dat primitive (the one with all faces and edges present), where other primitives would have been more appropriate. It seems to me that in several of (...) (22 years ago, 20-Nov-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
