The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
Do any of the 3D printer owning people here know of anything that can print a Fusion 360 (.F3D file) Sketch (preferably with dimension lines) or even a DXF file in 1:1 scale?
Everything I find either fails to load, or squeezes it onto a single sheet, buggering the scale.
All I want to do is verify my measurements against the physical object to verify the sizes before I get too far with drawing, extruding, and chopping to fit the printer I'm thinking of buying ... which only goes to 210 x 210 x 200mm.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
Don't have a printer, but have you tried the AutoDesk Viewer? It looks like it is free (with an account signup): Autodesk Viewer | Free Online File Viewer. It also looks like it can print to a regular printer, but I'm not sure about that.
I could write an entire article p() and v() Considered Harmful. Just as the use of goto should usually be restricted to the compiler, thread safety should usually be restricted to a few places by using cooperative scheduling (running work to completion). Willy-nilly preemptive scheduling is an abomination that causes artificial complexity, polluting the code with stuff that has nothing to do with the specifications.
Yes, I'm a big fan of cooperative threading. I haven't worked in C#, but I'd guess that yield() does the same thing as what I call Pause() in my code.
Symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) is another abomination because it reintroduces the need for all this thread safety nonsense. It is lamentable that Intel ran contests on how to adapt software to these platforms. SMP is a case of the hardware team having fun at the expense of the software team, which we all know is backwards from how things should be!
I also look at it this way, that there are only three good numbers: 0, 1, and infinity. So if I need more than one core, will 2, 4, or 8 always be enough? The general solution is to design software that runs in a distributed (networked) manner. This adds artificial complexity of its own, but it's the truly scalable solution and is unavoidable if you need an arbitrary amount of horsepower. The resulting software can also run on an SMP platform by dividing the shared memory so that each core has its own sandbox, with shared memory perhaps being used only for efficient interprocessor messaging.
each time it encounters a yield return it returns from the function. The next time the function is called essentially it will start after that yield return statement at the next line.
This voodoo is accomplished using a state machine the compiler builds for you.
So each time the routine is called, it knows what state it's in and can execute the next instruction.
So in your cooperative multithreading code. you'd just loop over whatever you needed to loop over, and time is returned to your function because the yield return dropped you out of the function in the "middle of the call"
it's a lot easier to use than to explain, but it helps if you have familiarity with the concept of a coroutine first.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
Interesting and not what I expected. Many folks couldn't be bothered to write a state machine, so we get blocking RPCs. And why do we get an hourglass or little spinning wheel on the screen? It's because some wanker couldn't be bothered to write a state machine!
So I'm curious as to what kind of state machine this generates. It picks up where it left off, but a serious state machine handles any input that could arrive. I'm guessing that this blocks, which is OK sometimes (guaranteed low latency) but not others (waiting for a reply from another processor). It's the latter case that can put a little spinning wheel on the screen for an unbecoming length of time, which is loathsome.
And I thought that C++ was a kitchen-sink language!
That said, good on them that they allow other inputs. Not that I care for RPCs. But if this is in the thread's entry function, it's not much different than accepting any message that could arrive, so it looks like the kind of thing I'd aim for.