[Bf-committers] Increase hard max of subdivision operator?
raingloom42 at gmail.com
Sat Apr 30 11:53:56 CEST 2016
Yeah, on second thought the warning would get irritating pretty fast. I
vote on Gandalf's too.
On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Patrick Boelens <p_boelens at msn.com> wrote:
> This would be internally inconsistent though, and frankly seems like
> overkill to me. +1 from me on Gandalf's soft/ hard limit suggestion.
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 30, 2016, at 1:39 AM, Rain Gloom <raingloom42 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > IMHO a warning would suffice. It shouldn't be hard to compute an estimate
> > of the number of resulting vertices/faces, so the warning could say
> > something like: "This will create <resulting-number-of-vertices> which
> > might slow down your computer."
> > Same thing as asking before overwriting a file or closing without saving.
> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 6:36 AM, gandalf3 <zzyxpaw at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> As seen in this SE question
> >> <http://blender.stackexchange.com/q/51525/599>, the current
> >> number of subdivision cuts (100) is easily within the realm of what
> >> users would like to use.
> >> What is the reasoning behind having a hard-maximum at all? I can
> >> understand having a soft-maximum to protect against accidentally setting
> >> the number of cuts too high, but that system is already in place and
> >> works well.
> >> Would it not be more user-friendly to allow any number to be typed
> >> directly, especially if the user wants a prime number of cuts?
> >> This maximum apparently didn't exist in 2.74
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bf-committers mailing list
> >> Bf-committers at blender.org
> >> https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-committers mailing list
> > Bf-committers at blender.org
> > https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
More information about the Bf-committers