Why, thank you good sir! Some excellent ideas there, and I really appreciate you taking the time to go through it so thoroughly. I’m currently at hom…
The two “dynamic” arrays don’t have a final size as such, they grow and shrink as the algorithm moves along. There is no logical connection between a …
Well, they certainly do something that uses an awful lot of memory ;-). gc() does nothing to reclaim memory, regardless of speed issues, so it feels l…
Possibly more elegant: len=10 the_angle=45 new_point=[cos the_angle, sin the_angle, 0]*len no rotation, just sin/cos.
Not entirely sure what you are doing, but: len=10 –length to new point rot=eulerangles 0 0 45 –angle to rotate new_vector=[len,0,0] –a v…
Growing multimaterials will slow down your attaches. I don’t really think you can get around this, if a large number of mat-id’s is the correct result…
An easy way to think of it is this: if you set camera FOV to 90, the width of the view will be target distance * 2
Given a mesh with whole, connected elements (no holes), there is a superiour method for finding correct face-normals: -select/isolate elements (mesho…
I spoke too soon. Nothing fixes what must be a serious shortcoming of the MAX implementation of double precision. This code: sm_a = 6378137.0d0 sm…
I’ve had trouble with double precision before that I never resolved. Upon reading this, I tried executing the following two lines of code: real_long=…
I think the important thing is not the numbering of the vertices, but the order they have in face definitions. As far as I can tell, the proper orderi…
The issue with materials arise when/if all the objects have different materials, and MAX creates/appends them to a new multimaterial that grows extrem…
Turning off undo is probably the solution, but you might also consider material handling. I’m not sure how this is handled in maxscript, but the defau…
What I meant was, given a task that could be sliced into any reasonable number of seperate threads, how would one determine an optimal number of threa…