Wasn't it Jan Walzer who wrote:
>
>> Rather than nitpicking about the function syntax, we should try to solve
>> the initial query.
>
>it  was a problem in the logic of thinking ...
>What I changed was:
>
>    #local pp1=vnormalize(p1-c)+c+Fn(p1.x,p1.y,p1.z)*p1;
>    #local pp2=vnormalize(p2-c)+c+Fn(p2.x,p2.y,p2.z)*p2;
>    #local pp3=vnormalize(p3-c)+c+Fn(p3.x,p3.y,p3.z)*p2;
>

The problem was a typo on the third of those lines. The variable at the
end should be p3 not p2.



>to the following:
>
>    #local pp1=vnormalize(p1-c);
>    #local pp2=vnormalize(p2-c);
>    #local pp3=vnormalize(p3-c);
>    #local pp1=pp1+Fn(pp1.x,pp1.y,pp1.z)*pp1+c;
>    #local pp2=pp2+Fn(pp2.x,pp2.y,pp2.z)*pp2+c;
>    #local pp3=pp3+Fn(pp3.x,pp3.y,pp3.z)*pp3+c;
>.
>So it was neither the bozo, nor an accuracy-problem ...
>What makes me wonder is, WHY this makes a difference ?

In this version you correctly typed pp3 rather than pp2.

-- 
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure

Post a reply to this message

"Mike Williams" <mik### [at] nospamplease> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:Ee92YCAG4l+7Ew### [at] econymdemoncouk...
> Wasn't it Jan Walzer who wrote:
> >
> >> Rather than nitpicking about the function syntax, we should try to solve
> >> the initial query.
> >
> >it  was a problem in the logic of thinking ...
> >What I changed was:
> >
> >    #local pp1=vnormalize(p1-c)+c+Fn(p1.x,p1.y,p1.z)*p1;
> >    #local pp2=vnormalize(p2-c)+c+Fn(p2.x,p2.y,p2.z)*p2;
> >    #local pp3=vnormalize(p3-c)+c+Fn(p3.x,p3.y,p3.z)*p2;
> >
>
> The problem was a typo on the third of those lines. The variable at the
> end should be p3 not p2.


Ahhh ... and why didn't anybody tell me this before ? ....
look, what a thread has evolved, only because nobody noticed this typo ...

--
Jan Walzer <jan### [at] lzernet>

Post a reply to this message