Subject:
|
Re: Sorting
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.storage
|
Date:
|
Sun, 25 Oct 1998 04:18:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5642 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lpien@NOSPAM.ctp.com> wrote
> When rooting for a part, which is easier, finding the blue 1x3 bricks in a bin
> of 1x3s, or finding the 1x3s in a bin of blue 1x2s, 1x3s and 1x4s? The former.
> Trust me. Blue jumps out at you far easier than three studs of length.
Trust him. It is.
For small amounts having "misc" bins works well, but I use a threshold of
about 2x4x2" of small parts before I split them out. This is because with
Technic I find it easier to remember where a given part is than to
scrabble through a bin looking for it. Especially the gray parts...
> Being anal about sorting is a good thing. It lets you have more time to build.
> When I'm on a building run, I want everything at hand because the models flow
> from my fingers the same way code does when I'm on a coding run.
Hmm, coding runs (I did most of my weeks typing yesterday morning, after
a week of head-banging a particular problem that my coworker couldn't
understand why it was a problem, let alone help with it. But I got it in
the end. Now to spend the long weekend building MS models I think.
(instead of building MS programs... now there's a scary symbol
overloading)
> 1 - Kids are entropy agents in a big way. Order is NOT their friend.
They love order - it makes the mess so much more distinctly their own :)
Moz
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Sorting
|
| (...) Ah, the canonical sorting debate has arisen. There is a camp (myself among the adherents) that feels that sorting by color is a total waste of time (except for green :-)). Far more important to sort by size and type. When rooting for a part, (...) (28 years ago, 22-Oct-98, to lugnet.storage)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
