 | | Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, under the subject "Re: 3626b101.dat - Minifig Head (...) This is a problem. This potentially blows the whole approach to numbering patterned parts. And it's going to be more of a problem in the future, as we get more blank (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) I can't remember the last time "dropping DOS support" came up, but it seems like a very long time ago! Is "real DOS" (not real-mode DOS :o) still really something that needs to be supported? I understand that DOS as a filesystem format needs (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) etc.) Don't LDRAW and LEDIT run in "real DOS" mode? They won't understand the long filenames even if you run them from within windows. I'm pretty sure some folks still use LEDIT. How about replacing the .dat extension with the pattern number (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
Hello Steve, I don't know what happened to the source code of Ldraw and Ledit? LDraw and Ledit are the only programs that are limited to the 8.3 scheme (perhaps one or two old tools too). As far as I know there are easy to use and easy to implement (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) That is not the real problem, there are still operating systems in use that simply don't support long filenames. We are a world wide community with participants from regions that are less wealthy then yours, and these might still use machines (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
Hello Manfred, I don't want to be ignorant, but... - World is evolving. Even not so wealthy users should be now at a development level of Windows 95a (first version) (how many years Win95 exists now?). - The 'old' technology (here the 8.3 filenames) (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) Please DO NOT start using long file names in the ldraw library. Everyone (including me) who uses ledit will not be able to use those parts properly. (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
A few things (any old-timers feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about anything): 1. LDraw/LEdit (the root of all derivative work) are DOS programs. As such, they can never support more than 8.3 filenames. 2. James Jessiman--the author of these (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
Hello Travis, (...) That's no point. If the source of LDraw would be available it would be easy to implement long filename support... even in a DOS program. But... (...) ... if the source was never available my point if view has died. It was just a (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) And the rich set the pace ? What you say here only confirms that you're part of an economy with a relatively high consumption rate. Maybe your view of "the World" is not a realistic one. For instance, I personaly made the tranfer from MS-DOS (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
Yes, I run original LDraw.exe from Win 3.1/DOS 6.22 three times a year (in my 486/25 at my parents' home). I also use DOS versions of Arj.exe and PK[Un]Zip in batch procedures and when I want full control. I will probably use a DOS machine when (or (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) Oh, you mean that a DOS directory is limited to a specific number of files? I recall that Norton Commander 5.0 for DOS is limited to, I think it was 2000 files... -- Tore Eriksson Sweden ICQ: 76066510 LEGO: MOC++++ FS,SP,TO++ TC+ LS YB@m (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Manfred Moolhuysen writes: Please no emotionful 'rich people set the pace , poor people are starving' discussions. That is off-topic. I'm a technical consultant and a programmer. So of course I have a technical point of view. (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
This is unbearable. I propose a potential solution to the problem (URL) and nobody bothers to comment on it. Instead everyone seems to prefer to rehash the tired old arguments on the merits of various operating systems. Who cares? This has been (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
Hello Tore! (...) recall that Norton Commander 5.0 for DOS (...) No. FAT16 has only limitations in the root directory for maximum number of files. That NC was limited to 2000 files was a memory allocation problem. What I meant was: 1) The first (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) Oh yeah! It's my fav modeling tool. I seem to remember that Jeremy Sproat also said he used LEdit. (...) But will that work in LEdit? I normally specify part names in LEdit by the base file name, i.e. everything before the ".DAT" and LEdit (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering [DAT]
|
|
(...) While not directly related, I've found that, while using subparts from the parts\s directory, the names will be truncated if they're more than 8 characters long and therefore won't render in LEdit or LDraw. For instance, a line like: 1 16 0 0 (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) Sidestepping various landmines, two ideas that come to mind for addressing this issue: 1. Allow letters in pattern id's, to increase the number of 2-digit from 100 to 1296. This could work, but would make recognition of patterned element files (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
Hello Fredrik, (...) IMHO this is the best and most compatible idea so far. I believe Don Heyse had the same idea too. Greetings, Carsten Schmitz -- Greetings, Carsten Schmitz "Fredrik Glöckner" <fredrik.glockner@bio.uio.no> wrote in message (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) Ah, it was never my intention to "steal" anyone's idea. I just haven't had the time to read all the interesting LUGNET articles recently. Fredrik (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) Actually you didn't steal anything, I had a different idea: (...) Which you refuted: (...) before explaining your completely different (and perhaps better) idea. However, I just tested my scheme in LEDIT and it worked. So there! ;^) If you (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) Yes. As long as you specify the extension, LDraw doesn't care what it is. LEdit might be a different story, I don't know. (...) Don't use MAKELIST, it can't handle more than 1000 parts. Use MKLIST instead. And MKLIST indexes every file in the (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) I'd rather not encode file-nameish data into the file-extension. That feels like a bad thing to do -- extensions indicate the *type* of file, not the specific file. I realize that "DAT" is not the greatest extension in the world, as it's far (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
|
(...) True, but since these are merely parts files and as such will reside in the LDRAW\PARTS directory, I think the *type* of file will be obvious. I agree this certainly feels like a "bad thing" at first, but it does give you a lot more characters (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
