Subject:
|
Re: Multiple MovedTo Arguments Really Legal?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.mlcad
|
Date:
|
Sat, 6 Mar 2004 07:37:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5239 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Michael Lachmann wrote:
>
> "Tore Eriksson" <tore.eriksson@mbox325.swipnet.se> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:Hu4JnF.15r3@lugnet.com...
> <SNIP>
> > >
> > > Yes, MLCad messes this up as well. The problem is that you're using the 0
> > > ~MovedTo comment as a reference instead of the type 1 line in the file. 0
> > > ~MovedTo is a comment and not a META command and shouldn't be treated as such.
> > >
> > > -Orion
> >
> > My opinion is that neither MLCad nor MovedTo.exe messes anything up. I think
> > it's the multiple MovedTo arguments that messes everything up, and the change of
> > its usage, be it just a comment or not. And not to mention to have rendering
> > code in a MovedTo file! It should be illegal. :)
>
>
> MLCad does not mess it up, but doesn't detect more levels yet. Indirectly
> you get it done, if you load a model several time until no ~movedto parts
> are used anymore :-)
>
> Michael
It did for me. When MLCad found the refernce to 973p11.dat and asked if I
wanted to upgrade, it changed all the "973p11.dat" references to "973p1a,.dat"
references. Note the ",".
-Orion
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Multiple MovedTo Arguments Really Legal?
|
| "Tore Eriksson" <tore.eriksson@mbox3...wipnet.se> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:Hu4JnF.15r3@lugnet.com... <SNIP> (...) 0 (...) 0 (...) such. (...) think (...) change of (...) rendering (...) MLCad does not mess it up, but doesn't detect more levels (...) (20 years ago, 6-Mar-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
