Subject:
|
Re: Multiple MovedTo Arguments Really Legal?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Sat, 6 Mar 2004 17:50:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
998 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Chris Dee wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> > > A far better solution had been to keep the 973p11.dat as base part but retitle
> > > it to "~Minifig Torso with Dungarees Pattern",
> >
> > Sorry, skip the rest of the statement. No need to touch the parts with
> > hard-coded pattern (p1a, p1b, p1c, and p1j).
> >
> > The un-orthodox moved to - remark can be altered to a genuine remark statement,
> > like this:
> >
> > 0 ~Minifig Torso with Dungarees Pattern
> > 0 Name: 973p11.dat
> > 0 Author: Chris Dee <chris_w_dee@hotmail.com>
> > 0 (LDRAW_ORG Part UPDATE 2003-02)
> > 0 REM Moved to 973p1a, 973p1b, 973p1c
> >
> > and, of cousre likewise:
> >
> > 0 ~Minifig Torso with Futuron Pattern
> > 0 Name: 973p15.dat
> > 0 Author: Chris Dee (chris_w_dee@hotmail.com)
> > 0 (LDRAW_ORG Part UPDATE 2003-03)
> > 0 REM Moved to 973p1d, 973p1e
> >
> > ... and so on with 973p35.dat and 973p37.dat. Are there any more?
> >
> > With these changes, everyone as well as all applications should be happy (I
> > hope...)
> >
> >
> > /Tore
>
> Yes, I guess this would work. although I'd prefer to add "(Deprecated)" or
> something similar to the title.
Never heard the word "deprecated" before, but I can guess its meaning from the
context. It's fine, "(Obsolete)" could maybe work too, but I don't care that
much about the words chosen, long as it doesn't interfer with any tools.
> I'm just dismayed that it has taken 7 months for
> anyone to realise that this causes problems with the toolset.
Once I thought I was quite good at English, but that was before I started hang
around in RTL. (It started with a correction of "of coarse"...) Now I've come to
realize of my limits. :) I guess dismayed - never heard that word either! -
means something like disappointed or surprised in a slightly negative way, and I
can understand your feelings.
Well, the Datsville project has been almost dead (from my side) for the past
part updates, until the very nice recent animation woke up my interest again. As
movedto.exe was born from the needs of Datsville and I rarely use it outside
Datsville, the problem was not discovered until I ran that utility just the
other day.
If I gave these files a Certify vote in te PT, I am highly co-responsible for
this problem...
>
> The full list is :
> 973p11 ~Moved to 973p1a, 973p1b, 973p1c
> 973p15 ~Moved to 973p1d, 973p1e
> 973p35 ~Moved to 973p3n, 973p3q
> 973p37 ~Moved to 973p3r, 973p3s
> 973p4a ~Moved to 973p4n, 973p4q
> 973p65 ~Moved to 973p6b, 973p6c, 973p6d, 973p6e
>
> I'll add these to the PT.
>
> Chris
Thanks Chris! I humbly suggest that the words "Moved to" can be changed into
"Replaced by" to avoid confusion, but I promise I will not be upset if the
suggestion is turned down.
/Tore
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Multiple MovedTo Arguments Really Legal?
|
| (...) Yes, I guess this would work. although I'd prefer to add "(Deprecated)" or something similar to the title. I'm just dismayed that it has taken 7 months for anyone to realise that this causes problems with the toolset. The full list is : 973p11 (...) (20 years ago, 6-Mar-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
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
|
|
|
|
