Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> Jerome ???
Yes! I revealed secret? Sorry!
In 'SOR:nurbs or not' clipka wrote:
> @Jerome: Even if the implementation would be similar to that of bicubic
> patch type 1, i.e. an internal translation to something mesh-like, so
> that in a sense the whole job could also be done by the exporter by
> generating a mesh2 object, I think a NURBS primitive would be beneficial
> in order to minimize file I/O in the workflow.
It is very good when people call each other by name.
Post a reply to this message