Why is the surface normal defined as glm::cross(ptder(0, 1), ptder(1, 0)) instead of the usual glm::cross(ptder(1, 0), ptder(0, 1))?

[mckay-w]

Hi, thanks for your great work on tinynurbs!
I noticed that in core/evaluate.h, the surface normal is computed as:
glm::vec<3, T> n = glm::cross(ptder(0, 1), ptder(1, 0));

This is the opposite order from the usual right-hand rule definition, which is typically:
glm::vec<3, T> n = glm::cross(ptder(1, 0), ptder(0, 1));

Q:
Is this reversed order intentional?

• If so, is it for compatibility with a specific modeling standard, coordinate system (e.g., Y-up vs Z-up), or rendering convention?

If I swap the arguments to follow the conventional Su × Sv order, are there any downstream implications I should be aware of (e.g., in trimming, tessellation, or derivative computation)?