Subject:
|
Re: Mirrored parts and studs
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:48:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1394 times
|
| |
|
|
I am generally against new meta-commands, but inspired by "0 BFD INVERTNEXT",
how about something like "0 MIRRORING KEEPPOSITIVENEXT". The more accurate
syntax, I leave to the gurus...
/Tore
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Mirrored parts and studs
|
| (...) We definitely don't want to do this. It's unnecessary, because the sign of the determinant in the matrix specifying the sub-part tells you whether the sub-part is mirrored. The above might allow the program to do less math, but that's not an (...) (21 years ago, 2-Jul-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Mirrored parts and studs [DAT]
|
| (...) I favour the following scenario - put the part detail in a subpart, but the studs themselves in the main part files. s\xxxxs01.dat bulk of part excluding decorated surfaces and studs (handedness of lowest numbered part) xxxx.dat 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 (...) (21 years ago, 1-Jul-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
25 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
|
|
|
|
