From: SuezanneC Baskerville
What is that you don't understand?
What is that you think is wrong?
I think if these were defined incorrectly someone would have noticed it by now.
Have you put the commands in a script? If so, what was the result and show us the code.
I think the llSetLocalRot is used incorrectly, wth the wrong parameters as it takes no account of the rotation of the root prim.
It does what it says it will do but only under specific conditions.
I have and the result is unexpected to say the least.
1.Construct two cubes.
2.Flatten one to a square color the top and bottom faces to different colors to assist identification.
3.Attach the flattened square to the side of the cube at mid height.
4.Link the two prims with the cube as the root prim.
5.Insert the example script from the LSL Wiki llSetLocalRot into the flattened cube and change the movement value to 30 degrees to make it more visible.
6.Save the script.
7.Finish editing.
8.Edit the object and edit linked parts.
9.Select the flattened prim.
10.Check the rotation values in the edit panel.
11.Finish editing.
12.Touch the flattened child prim.
13.Edit the object.
14.Edit linked parts.
15.Check the rotation values in the edit panel.
16.Repeat 11 - 15 4 more times.
When I do this the rotation values go to X: 180 Y: 60 Z: 180 which I find strange.
It was not until I put an oriented texture on the faces (which did not change) that I started to realise the rotation vlaues are based on something else. So perhaps the example text is not wrong but my interpretation of the expected results is.
Thanks for forcing me to check into it more deeply.
My original problem seems to be related to the orientation of the root prim.
I was using a cylinder turned horizontal with a flat square wing one one side and when I used the llSetLocalRot example the flat wing turned on the first click to that I have just indicated. Most unexpected! So I think it needs factored in some way by the global rotation?
On your last comment there are lots of entries in the Wiki which have obviously never been completed and many contain errors of a minor nature. So accepting what is written as gospel truth is foolish in extreme. That is however the nature of a Wiki it needs tender care and nurturing.