Seems a cone would have vertex normals so as to appear smoothly rounded, and a pyramid would have face normals so as to appear faceted. Somehow anything that uses the same procedure to make either cone or pyramid would need to also be able to set either type of normal at creation time.
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Eugene Minov <[email protected]> wrote: > yes, I agree. If by any chance it would be added, "Cone / Pyramid" would be > better option. > > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Harley Acheson <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > > If it's a pyramid it should have it's own create method > > > > I don't agree... > > > > We could duplicate the current "cone" code, call it "pyramid", and > restrict > > it to 3 or 4 sides only. But that would be incorrect because a pyramid > can > > have any number of sides. So then "cone" and "pyramid" would be > identical. > > Hmmm... that's because they are basically the same things. > > > > We could rename our "cone" to "pyramid" or to "Cone / Pyramid" or people > > can just get used to the difference in terminology. But having two items > in > > the list doing the same job with different names seems silly... > > > > Harley > > _______________________________________________ > > Bf-committers mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > > > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
