Talk:LlGetLocalRot: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Created page with 'Shouldn't the "if the script isn't physical" remark be removed? Because first of all, a script cannot be physical, and secondly, this function does work normally when the object ...' |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Shouldn't the "if the script isn't physical" remark be removed? Because first of all, a script cannot be physical, and secondly, this function does work normally when the object or prim is physical. So unless there is a good explanation for the remark, it should be changed to something meaningful or otherwise removed? [[User:Pentasis Adamczyk|Pentasis Adamczyk]] 22:41, 28 May 2010 (UTC) | Shouldn't the "if the script isn't physical" remark be removed? Because first of all, a script cannot be physical, and secondly, this function does work normally when the object or prim is physical. So unless there is a good explanation for the remark, it should be changed to something meaningful or otherwise removed? [[User:Pentasis Adamczyk|Pentasis Adamczyk]] 22:41, 28 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
:Sounds like a hold over from the original documentation (we used it as a boot strap but it contained errors). I'll remove it. -- '''[[User:Strife_Onizuka|Strife]]''' <sup><small>([[User talk:Strife_Onizuka|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Strife_Onizuka|contribs]])</small></sup> 05:52, 29 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:52, 28 May 2010
Shouldn't the "if the script isn't physical" remark be removed? Because first of all, a script cannot be physical, and secondly, this function does work normally when the object or prim is physical. So unless there is a good explanation for the remark, it should be changed to something meaningful or otherwise removed? Pentasis Adamczyk 22:41, 28 May 2010 (UTC)