 | | Hidden male connectors (studs)
|
|
Hello LCD "community", As female connectors (mainly stud inlets) can effectively hide male connectors (mainly studs), we should ensure that the LCD project do not waste such an opportunity to further speed up LDraw display. I think this possibility (...) (24 years ago, 6-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: What is the state of LMPL proposal?
|
|
(...) KACS is working, as I know, but he has other tasks too. We must be patient; he is often slow, but the result worths the time. (Damien, would you be so kind to forward this mail to the group? It needs a lot of work to respond on the website (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | What is the state of LMPL proposal?
|
|
Is it deferred or still coming soon? Damien (24 years ago, 9-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | I hold ALM until LMPL publication
|
|
Hi Kiss Attila Csongor, Hi Láng Attila D, Now I stop talking about LCD or LMPL, until publication. Before publication I can not evaluate if my own approach has any "added value". Termolo is a general purpose language with simplistic syntax. Before (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | I hold ALM, at least until LMPL publication
|
|
Hi Kiss Attila Csongor, Hi Láng Attila D, Now I stop talking about LCD or LMPL, until publication. Before publication I can not evaluate if my own approach has any "added value". Termolo is a general purpose language with simplistic syntax. Before (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Will LMPL be Simulation-approach or Usage-approach ?
|
|
DG> Do not forget to download Spiderbot.dat (in lugnet.cad.models) It came automatically via e-mail. :) DG> We embody two different well-known approaches. Both of LCD and LMPL embody these two approaches. DG> First : the Simulation approach. DG> And (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re[4]: I have read the article about LCD
|
|
Hi Damien! DG> Now you speak about layers. DG> That is precisely what I called "multiple syntax levels". DG> Software layers are known to be very bad for software engineering and design DG> in general. I don't think so. What about object oriented (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Will LMPL be Simulation-approach or Usage-approach ?
|
|
Hi Láng Attila D. Hi Kiss Attila Csongor, Do not forget to download Spiderbot.dat (in lugnet.cad.models) The debate becomes VERY interesting. We embody two different well-known approaches. First : the Simulation approach. Things are nothing but (...) (24 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Re[2]: I have read the article about LCD
|
|
(...) Hello Láng Attila D. Hello Kiss Attila Csongor, Now you speak about layers. That is precisely what I called "multiple syntax levels". Software layers are known to be very bad for software engineering and design in general. On the contrary, ALM (...) (24 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re[2]: I have read the article about LCD
|
|
Hi all, hello Damien! DG> This thread is not very frequented now. DG> May be because the debate has to become much more technical. Yes, there is not so many traffic here nowadays. We knew this will be a long project because it's a big project with (...) (24 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: I have read the article about LCD
|
|
Hello Láng Attila D. and Hello Kiss Attila Csongor, This thread is not very frequented now. May be because the debate has to become much more technical. (...) I mean if LMPL is not sufficient, we are in danger to either add more and more syntax (...) (24 years ago, 25-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: I have read the article about LCD
|
|
(...) What are you meaning by multiple syntax levels, Damien? (...) Let me report that LMPL is almost ready. It is going to be published soon. (...) LMPL contains these in theory. (...) Of course we should. (...) Well, this seems to be usable. In (...) (24 years ago, 25-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | I have read the article about LCD
|
|
I have read the article about LCD. The primary usage of an LCad library is to provide many quality virtual parts. So the future of LDraw library is more and better parts. The primary usage of an LCad tool is to select and position virtual parts. So (...) (24 years ago, 24-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Re[2]: Movement and friction
|
|
(...) I agree. Although I called it friction, I didn't mean the true physical property. It seems to me that the difference between grey pins and black pins is structural in nature: they are different connectors from a builder's point of view. I (...) (24 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re[2]: Movement and friction
|
|
Earlier on Mon, 28 Jan 2002 23:28:01 GMT on lugnet.cad.dev Ross Crawford<rcrawford@csi.com> wrote: ---...--- RC> I can see one limitation - the fact that technic axles are actually RC> significantly smaller than the holes in the bricks (round holes, (...) (24 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Movement and friction
|
|
I haven't commented substantially on LCD, so maybe I should. I am contemplating an algorithm that will find all of the possible stud-insertion points on a part. The obvious way to do this is to recognize the tube or enclosing box with their (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Movement and friction
|
|
(...) I think it probably is. The situations I'm thinking about are: 1. axles in technic bricks, which fit your "no friction" model; 2. the light grey low-friction pins, which could also fit the "no friction" model (with regard rotation); 3. the (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Movement and friction
|
|
(...) I think it probably is. The situations I'm thinking about are: 1. axles in technic bricks, which fit your "no friction" model; 2. the light grey low-friction pins, which could also fit the "no friction" model (with regard rotation); 3. the (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Movement and friction
|
|
(...) Welcome in my brain, Barney: I was writing about gravity and inertia in this very hour. The approach you describe may be usable, but as for myself, I'm talking in the LMPL proposal about a tensile strength instead. I see some difference. (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Movement and friction
|
|
I was thinking of friction as a simple on/off property: connections with friction only move during construction, whereas connections without are free to move under gravity or inertia or other forces during animation of the final model. Is this too (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
