Subject:
|
Re: Several replies to CLIPPING / WINDING
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 21 Oct 1999 10:06:59 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
RUI.MARTINS@nospamLINK.PT
|
Viewed:
|
819 times
|
| |
|
|
On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Steve Bliss wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Oct 1999 15:05:37 GMT, Rui Martins <Rui.Martins@link.pt> wrote:
>
> > You didn't knew in the past, because you didn't have the 0 INVERT
> > meta-command. So you can only assume it' NOT inverted.
>
> No. With current files, you don't know, so you can't assume anything.
Sorry, you are right here. I allways think in some form of winding (CW
or CCW) so this one slipped me, once again sorry, you are right.
Can't assume nothing.
> > If for some reason, it is inverted, then the old .DAT file was wrong,
> > and should be corrected.
>
> No, inversions are common.
what I said was relative to my way of thinking, without the previous
sentence, doesn't old up.
Man, that was a lousy afternoon ! 8b
> > You can't expect the new renders to be retro-compatible, but when in
> > retrocompatible mode, to provide the same NEW functionalities that they
> > were built for, as in the new design mode.
>
> Right. So non-wound-up files can't be backface culled. I don't see what
> you're getting at here.
>
> > I would say, that an old file, should not use references with inverted
> > matrixes, or you won't be able to have a retrocompatible format.
>
> But we don't get to specify what the old files are allowed to look like.
> We only get to deal with them as they are. :(
>
> > but if you really, really, want this, you can inforce this on the
> > renderer:
> >
> > /* for a specific reference in this file do */
> > if ((this file is NOT optimized) and
> > (this file has reference, with an inverted, matrix to another file))
> > {
> > ClIPPING commands should be ignored in all files referenced down
> > through this tree branch.
> > }
>
> Nope. Whether the subfile's matrix is inverted or not, you can't assume
> the intention was to invert the subfile. Or not.
>
> > Now this is getting really backwards compatible. 8)
>
> Yep. That's the most important requirement.
Agreed.
Rui Martins
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Several replies to CLIPPING / WINDING
|
| (...) No. With current files, you don't know, so you can't assume anything. (...) No, inversions are common. (...) Right. So non-wound-up files can't be backface culled. I don't see what you're getting at here. (...) But we don't get to specify what (...) (25 years ago, 20-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
15 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
