Subject:
|
Re: Inline POV code in official parts?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Tue, 29 Jul 2003 00:34:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3818 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Tony Hafner wrote:
> What's the current plan for POV-Ray code in official parts? I have been out of
> the loop for a while, but my last understanding was that parts with inline
> POV-Ray code don't have any chance of getting certified on the parts tracker.
> Is this still the case?
Yes, it's pretty much still the case. I would really prefer to not have
any POV code in the parts library at all. But if there must be some, I
think it should stay in the primitive files.
> I am specifically referring to cases where primitive substitution causes gaps
> around curved surfaces. The ldraw code looks fine in the usual tools (ldraw,
> MLCAD, L3Lab), and the extra code makes the parts render without gaps in
> POV-Ray.
I think a better solution is to work on POV versions of part files.
Generally, writing POV code is easier than LDraw code. So if you can
make an LDraw version of a file, you can make a POV version.
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Inline POV code in official parts?
|
| What's the current plan for POV-Ray code in official parts? I have been out of the loop for a while, but my last understanding was that parts with inline POV-Ray code don't have any chance of getting certified on the parts tracker. Is this still the (...) (23 years ago, 28-Jul-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
18 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
|
|
|
|
