Terry,

The Mailing-list Archive is not a Forum, I presume you are referring to it.
To save confusion, call it Empathy. (THE Forum is not dead yet, it's Schrodinger)

I did mention posting via Empathy had limitations. Gmail via web is probably your better option
(with your previously mentioned considerations).

Note that the format of the Empathy post/email is actually stored correctly for posterity,
it is just badly displayed.

But as I've said, things are not likely to get fixed in a hurry,
so for now it is probably not worth noting such things, unless they are critical.

Michael

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

Well, as the Admin, I suffer for you all and actually get three copies of all your prose,
via different avenues to make sure things are working. (Plus three versions of Digests...)

So if you want to see your Gmail posts, subscribe another email address (#2) and set up
some email rules, either just throw away all the gmails, or remove all #2's emails except your gmails.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

On Fri, 2021-07-02 at 20:26 +0100, Terry wrote:

Apart from that not having unequal sides and angles, There is a FAR
easier way to draw a polygonal figure as a regular polygon.

Give this a try:

cylinder(h=3,d=40,$fn=8);

Sorry, not a clear enough description. Is it a simple or complex
polygon, is concave acceptable? How will you refer to the specific
corners? How will you ensure that all the angles are valid, or are you
just changing one or two, and hoping the rest will sort themselves out,
and whatever the result is, it doesn't matter?. Any 7 random x,y
coordinates can generate an 8 sided  polygon. What have you tried? Is a
Mk 1 eyeball good enough, or are you looking for precision, involving
doing some sums? https://www.mathsisfun.com/geometry/octagon.html

On 02/07/2021 15:26, disruptivesolutionsnl@gmail.com wrote:

Hardly 'critical' but the corruption of code in Empathy was serious
enough to get a warning mention IMO.

I see it occurs again in Revar's post. Empathy clearly doesn't like the
asterisk symbol. Sometimes treating it as a signal to switch on italics.
Who knows what other symbols are wrongly handled?

Original:
let(ang=a+bsmall_ang)
r[cos(ang), sin(ang)]

Empathy corruption:
let(ang=a+bsmall_ang)
r[cos(ang), sin(ang)]

So using its impressively large archive to search and use helpful code
from years before I became a subscriber is no longer sensible.

Terry

====================

On Sat, 3 Jul 2021 11:24:40 +1000, you wrote:

That particular book was John Craig's "OpenSCAD Cookbook".

I didn't interpret Ben's "... where I could change the angle of each
corner, so the lengths of the 'lines' between them is not equivalent,"
as you seem to have done. I assumed the lines between the corners could
vary in length, as Ben said, but not the RADII too. But until we hear
back from Ben, I guess we won't know. ;-)

In my post I was also careful to add: "Although it's not a close match,
with a revised function it might be a start."

Terry

====================

On Sat, 3 Jul 2021 10:49:09 +1000, you wrote:

I posted a reply at 11:14 and it promptly appeared in Empathy. (Actually
an hour before, according to the time stamp!) But nearly five hours
later I've still have not received it in my mail (nor another reply
posted at 11:37).

I'll try again. Here's a copy/paste from my Sent folder

Hardly 'critical' but the corruption of code in Empathy was serious
enough to get a warning mention IMO.

I see it occurs again in Revar's post. Empathy clearly doesn't like the
asterisk symbol. Sometimes treating it as a signal to switch on italics.
Who knows what other symbols are wrongly handled?

Original:
let(ang=a+bsmall_ang)
r[cos(ang), sin(ang)]

Empathy corruption:
let(ang=a+bsmall_ang)
r[cos(ang), sin(ang)]

So using its impressively large archive to search and use helpful code
from years before I became a subscriber is no longer sensible.

Terry

On Sat, 3 Jul 2021 11:24:40 +1000, you wrote:

I received your previous email "From: Terry terrypingm@gmail.com"
As previously explained gmail does not send emails from you to you.

Please do not report anything further re Empathy.
It is no longer supported. It is available for people to use as a convenience.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

Posted this at 11:37, promptly appeared in Empathy (at 10:37!) but five
hours later still not received the email. This is not an initiating
first post, but a reply, so not subject to the Gmail 'feature' already
discussed. I DID get the 'Discuss post acknowledgment'. I am getting
other emails to my gmail ID. So most likely culprit appears to be some
setting or filter in my email client (Forte's Agent). I'll focus on that
but would welcome any other ideas.

Anyway, I'll try again, but not optimistic.

That particular book was John Craig's "OpenSCAD Cookbook".

I didn't interpret Ben's "... where I could change the angle of each
corner, so the lengths of the 'lines' between them is not equivalent,"
as you seem to have done. I assumed the lines between the corners could
vary in length, as Ben said, but not the RADII too. But until we hear
back from Ben, I guess we won't know. ;-)

In my post I was also careful to add: "Although it's not a close match,
with a revised function it might be a start."

Terry

On Sat, 3 Jul 2021 10:49:09 +1000, you wrote: