> It would be a good thing I believe if macro could accept any number of
> them instead and default to something when there aren't enough or too
> many.  Not sure if that's been considered before but most likely has
> been thought about over the past couple years.

Yes, I have seen it in a couple of other scripting languagfes (php and
python) and it's quite a neat tool.

> You might use the following instead since spheres don't lend well to
> cutting through varying thicknesses.
> 
> //object // commented out because isn't needed. //{
> // sphere {<0,0,Start - Pos>, Hole/2} cylinder {<0,-T/0.499,Start -
> Pos>,<0,T/0.499,Start - Pos>, Hole/2} //}

Yeah, I had thought about that, my thinking was that under normal use the
radius of the hole is going to be many times that of the thickness, and
the slight curve of the cut through the wall might make it look a bit
less perfect (as the real things are seldom perfect) when getting up
close.

Is it possible (I might try latter anyway) to make the cylinder a bit
rough then cut the hole with it?  I doubt that adding bumps would do it,
Or would it?

-- 

  Rob Brown-Bayliss
 ---======o======---

Post a reply to this message