 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Zeger Knaepen" <zeg### [at] povplace com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:446abc79$1@news.povray.org...
> np, I'll send you the code for this image and for the latest image
Thanks a lot, I have received them. I am checking them now. I appreciate it
a lot, and promise you to give you very well credits if I manage to use them
for the imperial carrier I am working on. Promised!
> I was planning however to make greeble-macros for some primitives, like
> cylinders, spheres, boxes, cones and torii
Yes! Go ahead with them! Tora! Tora! Tora!
Pleeeaaase, inform me (or all of us, here) somehow once you have them ready.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ten years later. Any progress? Any news? :-D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1/30/2016 12:44 PM, Sven Littkowski wrote:
> Ten years later. Any progress? Any news? :-D
>
News of what, Sven?
None of your recent posts have quoted who or what you are replying to.
As you say it was 10 years ago and if you are using a newsreader, like
me. Your posts appear as orphaned posts.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 30.01.2016 um 14:10 schrieb Stephen:
> On 1/30/2016 12:44 PM, Sven Littkowski wrote:
>> Ten years later. Any progress? Any news? :-D
>>
>
> News of what, Sven?
>
> None of your recent posts have quoted who or what you are replying to.
> As you say it was 10 years ago and if you are using a newsreader, like
> me. Your posts appear as orphaned posts.
That certainly depends on your newsreader settings.
But I do agree that re-opening discussions from 10 years ago isn't
really a too promising idea.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1/30/2016 3:15 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 30.01.2016 um 14:10 schrieb Stephen:
>> On 1/30/2016 12:44 PM, Sven Littkowski wrote:
>>> Ten years later. Any progress? Any news? :-D
>>>
>>
>> News of what, Sven?
>>
>> None of your recent posts have quoted who or what you are replying to.
>> As you say it was 10 years ago and if you are using a newsreader, like
>> me. Your posts appear as orphaned posts.
>
> That certainly depends on your newsreader settings.
>
Yes, true. I probably stopped Thunderbird from downloading all the posts
in p.b.i. as they only go back to 2010. Whereas in p.b.sceen-files the
earliest is 1997.
> But I do agree that re-opening discussions from 10 years ago isn't
> really a too promising idea.
>
Especially when you think of the age of some of the posters. <Gulp!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
(smiling)
Yes, of course you all are right. My newsreader (Thunderbird) also never
showed these very old posts. But just by very lucky accident, I found
these threads with the Google search engine. I didn't like to open them
with my web browser, as I prefer their display in Thunderbird.
That is the reason, why I "marked" those ancient threads with some sort
of comment. Less for restarting any discussion, but more for the reason
to bring them up again inside my Thunderbird newsreader.
I am trying to find the source code, Zeger Knaepen had published within
one of his comments within these threads, as I need now that macro.
Easier to find (hopefully) in the better sorted view Thunderbird gives me.
With other words: unless you have that macro, there is no reason to
continue those old discussions (I agree fully). Unless, greebles
motivate the one or other of you, then a new discussion would make sense.
Since I have them back in my newsreader now, I am searching them now for
that macro. My apologies for bringing these old (but for me highly
interesting) discussion back. :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1/30/2016 6:50 PM, Sven Littkowski wrote:
> (smiling)
> Yes, of course you all are right. My newsreader (Thunderbird) also never
> showed these very old posts. But just by very lucky accident, I found
> these threads with the Google search engine. I didn't like to open them
> with my web browser, as I prefer their display in Thunderbird.
>
> That is the reason, why I "marked" those ancient threads with some sort
> of comment. Less for restarting any discussion, but more for the reason
> to bring them up again inside my Thunderbird newsreader.
>
> I am trying to find the source code, Zeger Knaepen had published within
> one of his comments within these threads, as I need now that macro.
> Easier to find (hopefully) in the better sorted view Thunderbird gives me.
>
> With other words: unless you have that macro, there is no reason to
> continue those old discussions (I agree fully). Unless, greebles
> motivate the one or other of you, then a new discussion would make sense.
>
> Since I have them back in my newsreader now, I am searching them now for
> that macro. My apologies for bringing these old (but for me highly
> interesting) discussion back. :-)
>
Responding to an old post does not magically make the old post appear in
Thunderbird unless you also include the quoted text.
Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 31-1-2016 0:50, Sven Littkowski wrote:
> I am trying to find the source code, Zeger Knaepen had published within
> one of his comments within these threads, as I need now that macro.
> Easier to find (hopefully) in the better sorted view Thunderbird gives me.
>
Well, as I tend to keep (almost) everything, here is the greebles macro
you mention.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'greebles.inc.txt' (51 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Biiig thanks! Got it, Thomas!
Is it that version that can do boxes and cylinders, or is it the
previous version that does only boxes? Any idea?
---------------
Mike: yes, posting some little text did the trick for me in the
Thunderbird newsreader: I saw this thread, and it was right on top.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 31/01/2016 20:39, Sven Littkowski wrote:
> Biiig thanks! Got it, Thomas!
>
> Is it that version that can do boxes and cylinders, or is it the
> previous version that does only boxes? Any idea?
As far as I can tell, that's the version that does prisms.
There should be a parametric patch version somewhere
Ok, the attached zip-file may or may not contain all needed files, but
the code is not pretty..
at all.. :)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'parametric.zip' (9 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
