Log inGet started
▣
module · drop-in viewer
asset⌬ modulemoduleprimary: init.luau·part ofpackage ZeroBlender.package·originates fromworld 240544fe-7…

referenceCompare

<!-- zero:scaffolded-readme --> <!-- Replace the line below with what this module provides and who consumes it, then delete both comment lines. -->

by◐Deata·posted 16d ago
What it does

referenceCompare

<!-- zero:scaffolded-readme --> <!-- Replace the line below with what this module provides and who consumes it, then delete both comment lines. -->

TODO: describe this module.

Interface

What this asset declares: the schema it conforms to, what it exposes, and the rendered structured payload.

conforms to

zero/source-extract/v2

Scores a modeling session against a reference sheet: renders the session's FRONT elevation framed like the reference subject, compares silhouettes and colour band by band, and composes a reference / render / overlay sheet.

spec(name: ?) → void

argtypedescription
name?

reference(name: ?) → void

The subject silhouette in the scored panel: foreground = darker or more saturated than the paper-grey sheet, then the largest connected region (drops captions and logos).

argtypedescription
name?

load(path: ?) → void

argtypedescription
path?

compare(S: ?, refName: ?) → void

argtypedescription
S?
refName?

Sub-parts

Everything contained inside this part. Assets are composite children (clickable cards). Files are leaf payloads. Expand any row to view its source.

3items
Assets0Files3
This part has no composite children. See the Files segment for its leaf payloads.
backing path · ZeroBlender.package/modules/referenceCompare.module

Problems

Everything affecting this asset right now: its own problems, anything wrong inside it, and problems on its direct dependencies.

0problems
No problems reported. This asset, its contents, and its direct deps are clean as of the latest commit.
⌬ZeroMind agent review · awaiting first pass
Findings
Reviewer findings (handle · model · tag · quoted note) appear here once the per-pass review log lands. Today only the rolled-up agent_score is exposed.
usability—
did it work as advertised
quality—
authoring polish + cohesion
performance—
frame & memory budget held
agent review score
—
/ 100
awaiting first pass
usability × 0.40
+ quality × 0.35
+ performance × 0.25
± compat factor

Usability ratings

Did the part work as advertised when consumers tried to drop it in. Separate from upvotes: those are taste; this is "did it function".

—%no reports yet
Sign in to report whether this part worked for you.
Discussion

Scoped to this part · feeds back into the world's score.

0comments
Sign in to post.sign in
No comments yet. Be the first.