proposal: instead of using x/y/z for 3d coordinates, use h/v/d, horizontal, vertical, depth
-
proposal: instead of using x/y/z for 3d coordinates, use h/v/d, horizontal, vertical, depth
now nobody will be confused which axis is up
(note: proposal is tongue-in-cheek)
@eniko
eXpand (gain width)
Yeet (upwards)
Zoom (away) -
@eniko what's your proposal for UV coordinates?
@ratsnakegames those are 2d so x/y works but h/v also works i suppose
-
proposal: instead of using x/y/z for 3d coordinates, use h/v/d, horizontal, vertical, depth
now nobody will be confused which axis is up
(note: proposal is tongue-in-cheek)
@eniko@mastodon.gamedev.place Inspired by Kerbal Space Program and flight simulators, I'd suggest pitch/roll/yaw for rotation as well.
-
@ratsnakegames those are 2d so x/y works but h/v also works i suppose
@eniko yeah but you can't use the same letter twice
-
@eniko yeah but you can't use the same letter twice
@eniko (at least i always assumed they were UV coordinates because X and Y were already used for a vertex's 3d position)
-
@eniko (at least i always assumed they were UV coordinates because X and Y were already used for a vertex's 3d position)
@ratsnakegames ohhh that's what you mean lol
yeah idk why it's uv but i assume it is because xyzw were already taken
-
proposal: instead of using x/y/z for 3d coordinates, use h/v/d, horizontal, vertical, depth
now nobody will be confused which axis is up
(note: proposal is tongue-in-cheek)
@eniko sub-proposal to rename 'depth' to 'stabby' because it measure how close something is to stabbing you!
-
@ratsnakegames ohhh that's what you mean lol
yeah idk why it's uv but i assume it is because xyzw were already taken
@ratsnakegames so actually if you use h/v/d then that opens up x/y for texture coordinates, perfect!
-
@eniko
eXpand (gain width)
Yeet (upwards)
Zoom (away) -
proposal: instead of using x/y/z for 3d coordinates, use h/v/d, horizontal, vertical, depth
now nobody will be confused which axis is up
(note: proposal is tongue-in-cheek)
@eniko «ok but which horizontal is which»
-
proposal: instead of using x/y/z for 3d coordinates, use h/v/d, horizontal, vertical, depth
now nobody will be confused which axis is up
(note: proposal is tongue-in-cheek)
@eniko jokes aside, it's not a bad proposal. It's the same reason why I use row/col instead of x/y or i/j as indices in matrices.
-
proposal: instead of using x/y/z for 3d coordinates, use h/v/d, horizontal, vertical, depth
now nobody will be confused which axis is up
(note: proposal is tongue-in-cheek)
@eniko i mean depth is already used for size in the z dimension, like width and height are for x and y, so it should’ve been obvious already
-
@eniko jokes aside, it's not a bad proposal. It's the same reason why I use row/col instead of x/y or i/j as indices in matrices.
-
proposal: instead of using x/y/z for 3d coordinates, use h/v/d, horizontal, vertical, depth
now nobody will be confused which axis is up
(note: proposal is tongue-in-cheek)
@eniko What about row mayor / column mayor matrices
? ( and row / column vectors V * A or A * V ? ) -
proposal: instead of using x/y/z for 3d coordinates, use h/v/d, horizontal, vertical, depth
now nobody will be confused which axis is up
(note: proposal is tongue-in-cheek)
h/b/d - height/breadth/depth ?
-
@jessechounard @eniko see, your problem is that you're using y for the row, which is obviously wrong 8-D
-
proposal: instead of using x/y/z for 3d coordinates, use h/v/d, horizontal, vertical, depth
now nobody will be confused which axis is up
(note: proposal is tongue-in-cheek)
@eniko what about h / u / d for horizontal, yurizontal and depth ?
-
proposal: instead of using x/y/z for 3d coordinates, use h/v/d, horizontal, vertical, depth
now nobody will be confused which axis is up
(note: proposal is tongue-in-cheek)
@eniko h/v/d, obviously standing for height, vvidth, and distance-
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
