Talk:PRIM POSITION

Other Tag Duplication

Q: What is this 'other tag duplication' for which 'results are undefined'?

That is, what is a 'tag' here? Are 'tag's and 'rule's and 'flag's and such meant to be multiple words meaning the same thing, or multiple words meaning different things? Like do we say we have 'duplicated a tag' if we repeat a 'rule' more than once in a call to llSetPrimitiveParams or llGetPrimitiveParams and such?

-- Ppaatt Lynagh 06:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

I used the term 'tag' here because I couldn't think of a better term to describe a top level PRIM_* flag and it's parameter as a single entity. In this case, the documentation is saying that it is frowned upon to use a top level PRIM_* flag multiple times; that to do so can have undefined results. PRIM_POSITION is the only flag that can be used multiple times reliably, though this is undoubtedly a misfeature. 'rule' is a better term. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:10, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Set or Get, Your Option

We'd rather see:

<lsl> llSetPrimitiveParams([ ..., PRIM_POSITION, vector position, ... ] ... llGetPrimitiveParams([ ..., PRIM_POSITION, ... ]); ... </lsl>

where today in the PRIM_POSITION article we see:

<lsl> [ PRIM_POSITION, vector position ] ... llGetPrimitiveParams([ PRIM_POSITION ]); ... </lsl>

I think this because I am new, so I still now remember the pain of not knowing:

    i) that often Lsl defines the same PRIM op to do symmetric things inside both llGetPrimitiveParams and for llSetPrimitiveParams, and

    ii) that each PRIM op and its args appear in the list of Params catenated together with other ops and args.

I then think the spirit of wiki is that, since I believe in this change, I should make this change myself, and spark community review that way. However, the wikitext here is much too exotic for me to begin to know how to make and save a change like that myself here. So I ask ...

Q: Anyone out there both:

    a) agree with me on how we should improve this page for the newbie and

    b) know how to change the wikitext to achieve this effect?

Or please would you hint how I could learn to do this myself? Thanks in advance,

-- Ppaatt Lynagh 17:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do about supporting this. It looks like a good idea. Give me a bit of time to figure out how to best support this. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:10, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Turns out it's not so hard to support... that said, seeing it in print I now have some misgivings about it. I want to ask on the forums for peoples opinions about it. Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

About Caveats

Q: It seems to be duplicated. Any intention? Mako Nozaki 13:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

A1: Intelectual laziness.
A2: Some ideas require a bit of reiteration or people just do not understand. It's a trade off.
I don't remember which it is. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:26, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

lol I see.. -- Mako Nozaki 10:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Avatar movement limit

After some recent tests, it seems that the 54m avatar movement limit is no longer the case. The limit appears to have been raised from 54m to a full 1000(!) meters.

I will be testing this in detail to confirm. -- Felis Darwin 21:31, 22 August 2012 (PDT)

So you can move an seated avatar 1000m? Wow. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 08:56, 23 August 2012 (PDT)