|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 15/09/2016 à 18:59, William F Pokorny a écrit :
> On 09/15/2016 12:03 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>> On 9/15/2016 7:13 AM, William F Pokorny wrote:
>>> FYI - A new object in the "lemon" is in the master branch and not yet
>>> documented in povray's documentation. Jérôme has some documentation for
>>> it already on his page at:
>>
>> it's been added http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
>>
>> looks like the opening paragraph could use some help so I also created a
>> talk page as well: http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference_Talk:Lemon
>>
>
> Thanks. I've attempted some descriptive text at:
>
> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference_Talk:Lemon
>
> Bill P.
I like it, but the introducing description is a bit harsh for the
non-mathematically-addicted.
So I added a bit in the discussion too
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/15/2016 12:59 PM, William F Pokorny wrote:
> On 09/15/2016 12:03 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>> On 9/15/2016 7:13 AM, William F Pokorny wrote:
>>> FYI - A new object in the "lemon" is in the master branch and not yet
>>> documented in povray's documentation. Jérôme has some documentation for
>>> it already on his page at:
>>
>> it's been added http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
>>
>> looks like the opening paragraph could use some help so I also created a
>> talk page as well: http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference_Talk:Lemon
>>
>
> Thanks. I've attempted some descriptive text at:
>
> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference_Talk:Lemon
a combination of both: http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 16/09/2016 à 00:34, Jim Holsenback a écrit :
> On 9/15/2016 12:59 PM, William F Pokorny wrote:
>> On 09/15/2016 12:03 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>> On 9/15/2016 7:13 AM, William F Pokorny wrote:
>>>> FYI - A new object in the "lemon" is in the master branch and not yet
>>>> documented in povray's documentation. Jérôme has some documentation for
>>>> it already on his page at:
>>>
>>> it's been added http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
>>>
>>> looks like the opening paragraph could use some help so I also created a
>>> talk page as well: http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference_Talk:Lemon
>>>
>>
>> Thanks. I've attempted some descriptive text at:
>>
>> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference_Talk:Lemon
>
> a combination of both: http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
>
I really liked the passage about the american football and other real
evocations. It gave flesh to the description.
The constraint on minimal inner_radius is really a dangerous beast:
If base & cap radius are both 0, the inner_radius must be at least half
the distance between base and cap point (it would be a sphere)
So, as stated, the doc is false.
If base & cap radius are identical, the minimal inner_radius would be
sqrt( radius² + (distance/2)² ) , where distance is the length between
base and cap points.
when base & cap radius are different, it become nightmare (the exact
equation is in the code, if you dare to want to know it).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/16/2016 4:08 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> The constraint on minimal inner_radius is really a dangerous beast:
>
>
> If base & cap radius are both 0, the inner_radius must be at least half
> the distance between base and cap point (it would be a sphere)
>
> So, as stated, the doc is false.
>
>
> If base & cap radius are identical, the minimal inner_radius would be
> sqrt( radius² + (distance/2)² ) , where distance is the length between
> base and cap points.
>
> when base & cap radius are different, it become nightmare (the exact
> equation is in the code, if you dare to want to know it).
no worries /but/ i wish you'd been as verbose with your previous post
... however i see a bit of a conflict (perhaps i've characterized
incorrectly) item 4 and 5 seem a bit murky or are the /both/ correct:
http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 09/16/2016 04:08 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 16/09/2016 à 00:34, Jim Holsenback a écrit :
>> On 9/15/2016 12:59 PM, William F Pokorny wrote:
>>> On 09/15/2016 12:03 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks. I've attempted some descriptive text at:
>>>
>>> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference_Talk:Lemon
>>
>> a combination of both: http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
>>
>
> I really liked the passage about the american football and other real
> evocations. It gave flesh to the description.
>
>
>
> The constraint on minimal inner_radius is really a dangerous beast:
>
>
> If base & cap radius are both 0, the inner_radius must be at least half
> the distance between base and cap point (it would be a sphere)
>
> So, as stated, the doc is false.
>
>
> If base & cap radius are identical, the minimal inner_radius would be
> sqrt( radius² + (distance/2)² ) , where distance is the length between
> base and cap points.
>
> when base & cap radius are different, it become nightmare (the exact
> equation is in the code, if you dare to want to know it).
>
Argh. Sorry Jim. I got the wording for what I believe is the lower-most
bound for the inner radius wrong. I had in my head only to offer general
guidance there.
Adding the full equations is an option I guess - we do for other objects
in the docs. If we stick with a general description, we could build on
what you, Jérôme, wrote with perhaps:
If base & cap radius are both 0, the inner_radius must be at least half
the distance between base and cap point (it would be a sphere).
Otherwise the minimum inner radius is larger than half the distance
between base and cap point. Any time the inner radius given is too
small, the code uses the minimum radius over the specified one and
issues a warning.
Bill P.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 09/16/2016 08:53 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 9/16/2016 4:08 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
>> The constraint on minimal inner_radius is really a dangerous beast:
>>
>>
>> If base & cap radius are both 0, the inner_radius must be at least half
>> the distance between base and cap point (it would be a sphere)
>>
>> So, as stated, the doc is false.
>>
>>
>> If base & cap radius are identical, the minimal inner_radius would be
>> sqrt( radius² + (distance/2)² ) , where distance is the length between
>> base and cap points.
>>
>> when base & cap radius are different, it become nightmare (the exact
>> equation is in the code, if you dare to want to know it).
>
> no worries /but/ i wish you'd been as verbose with your previous post
> ... however i see a bit of a conflict (perhaps i've characterized
> incorrectly) item 4 and 5 seem a bit murky or are the /both/ correct:
>
> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
>
>
I believe we need to delete the following list item (me originally
leading you wrong I think):
* generally speaking Inner_Radius must be greater than or equal to the
distance between end points
or change it to:
* generally speaking the Inner_Radius must be greater than or equal to
half the distance between end points
Bill P.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/16/2016 9:33 AM, William F Pokorny wrote:
> Argh. Sorry Jim. I got the wording for what I believe is the lower-most
> bound for the inner radius wrong. I had in my head only to offer general
> guidance there.
like i said ... no worries
>
> Adding the full equations is an option I guess - we do for other objects
> in the docs. If we stick with a general description, we could build on
> what you, Jérôme, wrote with perhaps:
sticking with general description
>
> If base & cap radius are both 0, the inner_radius must be at least half
> the distance between base and cap point (it would be a sphere).
> Otherwise the minimum inner radius is larger than half the distance
> between base and cap point. Any time the inner radius given is too
> small, the code uses the minimum radius over the specified one and
> issues a warning.
i /think/ i've got it this time:
http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 16/09/2016 à 16:41, Jim Holsenback a écrit :
> On 9/16/2016 9:33 AM, William F Pokorny wrote:
>> Argh. Sorry Jim. I got the wording for what I believe is the lower-most
>> bound for the inner radius wrong. I had in my head only to offer general
>> guidance there.
>
> like i said ... no worries
>
>>
>> Adding the full equations is an option I guess - we do for other objects
>> in the docs. If we stick with a general description, we could build on
>> what you, Jérôme, wrote with perhaps:
>
> sticking with general description
>
>>
>> If base & cap radius are both 0, the inner_radius must be at least half
>> the distance between base and cap point (it would be a sphere).
>> Otherwise the minimum inner radius is larger than half the distance
>> between base and cap point. Any time the inner radius given is too
>> small, the code uses the minimum radius over the specified one and
>> issues a warning.
>
> i /think/ i've got it this time:
> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
>
I added yet another comment in the discussion.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/16/2016 12:05 PM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> I added yet another comment in the discussion.
http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 09/17/2016 08:57 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 9/16/2016 12:05 PM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
>> I added yet another comment in the discussion.
>
> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Lemon
>
>
Suggesting a correction and further tweak at bottom of the page:
http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference_Talk:Lemon
Bill P.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |