 | | Re: Parts Tracker - Using L3P-check to scan submitted files —Jacob Sparre Andersen
|
| | | Steve: (...) [...] Seems okay. (...) [...] Seems okay. (...) I would say yes. The last two definitely should, since they indicate unneeded resource use. The first one should really be split in to two triangles, if it really is intended to be (...) (23 years ago, 18-Oct-01, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Parts Tracker - Using L3P-check to scan submitted files —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | (...) [snip areas of agreement] (...) Which is sloppy, but not a killer error. (...) I didn't list the non-coplanar message with the "reject" group is because the thresholds of coplanarity are variable, not fixed. So we need to agree on what level (...) (23 years ago, 18-Oct-01, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Parts Tracker - Using L3P-check to scan submitted files —Jacob Sparre Andersen
|
| | | | Steve: (...) I assume that L3P reports the relevant lines, so it is trivial to remove one of the offending ones. (...) Right. Set a reasonably large threshold (0.1?) and reject based on it. Jacob (23 years ago, 18-Oct-01, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| | | | |
