Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.
And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.
Component density differs if you create component through blueprints vs programatically
See original GitHub issueComponent density differs if you create component through blueprints vs programmatically .
This is due to having to remember to call applyHotHeightDensityReduction() if you do so programmatically. This is not great because if you forget to call it, your component wont be equal to the 3D density. We should strive to have components density always equal to 3D density. We used to do this on component construction, but #657 changed this.
I don’t think that it needed to, the math just might be a little different for axial expansion.
#818 writes a unit tests demonstrating this behavior
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created a year ago
- Reactions:2
- Comments:7 (5 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Top Related Medium Post
Top Related StackOverflow Question
Troubleshoot Live Code
Top Related Reddit Thread
Top Related Hackernoon Post
Top Related Tweet
Top Related Dev.to Post
Top Related Hashnode Post
@keckler has pointed this out as well in https://github.com/terrapower/armi/issues/770 and it feels related to #820 .
I’ll spend some time on this today.
Looking into it.