| |
I just realized that LDConfig.ldr has a problem -- it does not have DOS line
breaks. Each line should be terminated by CR/LF. Instead, this file just has
LF characters.
This format breaks some functionality (maybe unreleased...) of LDAO.
I thought the LDraw file format specified CR/LF linebreaks, maybe I'm
misremembering. Or maybe that requirement was dropped? At any rate,
LDConfig.ldr should use the same formatting as the other files in the library
distribution.
Steve
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss wrote:
> I just realized that LDConfig.ldr has a problem -- it does not have DOS line
> breaks. Each line should be terminated by CR/LF. Instead, this file just has
> LF characters.
>
> This format breaks some functionality (maybe unreleased...) of LDAO.
>
> I thought the LDraw file format specified CR/LF linebreaks, maybe I'm
> misremembering. Or maybe that requirement was dropped? At any rate,
> LDConfig.ldr should use the same formatting as the other files in the library
> distribution.
>
> Steve
So I've noticed, too. But I've quit pointing those problems out. My latest
method to fix line breaks is simply to load and save the file in question in
Windows WordPad. That's all it takes to fix it, and WordPad is always installed
in Windows PC's.
/Tore
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss wrote:
> > I just realized that LDConfig.ldr has a problem -- it does not have DOS line
> > breaks. Each line should be terminated by CR/LF. Instead, this file just has
> > LF characters.
> >
> > This format breaks some functionality (maybe unreleased...) of LDAO.
> >
> > I thought the LDraw file format specified CR/LF linebreaks, maybe I'm
> > misremembering. Or maybe that requirement was dropped? At any rate,
> > LDConfig.ldr should use the same formatting as the other files in the library
> > distribution.
> >
> > Steve
>
> So I've noticed, too. But I've quit pointing those problems out. My latest
> method to fix line breaks is simply to load and save the file in question in
> Windows WordPad. That's all it takes to fix it, and WordPad is always installed
> in Windows PC's.
>
> /Tore
Many thanks for pointing this out. The CR/LF error in the LDC*.ldr files is now
fixed in the current downloads.
Chris Dee (LDraw Parts Library Admin)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss wrote:
> > I just realized that LDConfig.ldr has a problem -- it does not have DOS line
> > breaks. Each line should be terminated by CR/LF. Instead, this file just has
> > LF characters.
> >
> > This format breaks some functionality (maybe unreleased...) of LDAO.
> >
> > I thought the LDraw file format specified CR/LF linebreaks, maybe I'm
> > misremembering. Or maybe that requirement was dropped? At any rate,
> > LDConfig.ldr should use the same formatting as the other files in the library
> > distribution.
> >
> > Steve
>
> So I've noticed, too. But I've quit pointing those problems out. My latest
> method to fix line breaks is simply to load and save the file in question in
> Windows WordPad. That's all it takes to fix it, and WordPad is always installed
> in Windows PC's.
>
> /Tore
The 1.0 LDraw File Format specification itself is silent on the matter of line
endings, but indeed the "File Format Restrictions for Official Parts" requires
DOS line endings (http://ldraw.org/Article512.html#termination).
My opinion is that while well-behaved software should output files in adherence
with the specification (including the requirements for official parts,
generally), it should also be able handle minor discrepancies in the input (like
line endings). Perhaps that's another item for the to-do list, then!
Cheers,
Jim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Chris Dee wrote:
> Many thanks for pointing this out. The CR/LF error in the LDC*.ldr files is now
> fixed in the current downloads.
Wow. Thanks for the incredibly rapid resolution. :)
Steve
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Jim DeVona wrote:
> The 1.0 LDraw File Format specification itself is silent on the matter of line
> endings, but indeed the "File Format Restrictions for Official Parts" requires
> DOS line endings (http://ldraw.org/Article512.html#termination).
So, because I am a geek, and because I was curious about the practical reasons
for the DOS line ending requirement, I conducted a relatively comprehensive
compatibility inventory.
http://anoved.net/2010/01/ldraw-line-endings/
Of nearly twenty programs tested (see the post for repetitive screenshots), only
James J's LDRAW and LEDIT (and perhaps LDAO, although I didn't test it) actually
rely on DOS line endings. The rest, running on Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux,
were all capable of loading a model formatted with Unix line endings.
My conclusion is essentially that this is as it should be - we have a format
that preserves compatibility with older components, and tools that are robust
enough to understand reasonable exceptions to the format.
Also, wow - as I started collecting screenshots and trying out less familiar
programs, it became evident just how much interesting LDraw software there is. I
think this is great news for the community, and something for the developers
(and the Jessimans) to be proud of.
Jim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Jim DeVona wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Jim DeVona wrote:
>
> > The 1.0 LDraw File Format specification itself is silent on the matter of line
> > endings, but indeed the "File Format Restrictions for Official Parts" requires
> > DOS line endings (http://ldraw.org/Article512.html#termination).
>
> So, because I am a geek, and because I was curious about the practical reasons
> for the DOS line ending requirement, I conducted a relatively comprehensive
> compatibility inventory.
>
> http://anoved.net/2010/01/ldraw-line-endings/
>
> Of nearly twenty programs tested (see the post for repetitive screenshots), only
> James J's LDRAW and LEDIT (and perhaps LDAO, although I didn't test it) actually
> rely on DOS line endings. The rest, running on Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux,
> were all capable of loading a model formatted with Unix line endings.
>
> My conclusion is essentially that this is as it should be - we have a format
> that preserves compatibility with older components, and tools that are robust
> enough to understand reasonable exceptions to the format.
>
> Also, wow - as I started collecting screenshots and trying out less familiar
> programs, it became evident just how much interesting LDraw software there is. I
> think this is great news for the community, and something for the developers
> (and the Jessimans) to be proud of.
>
> Jim
Yes, what a fantastic collection of software we have, and all for free!
After trying some alternatives, I have returned to use Windows Notepad as my
LDraw file editor. The alternatives all had their advantages, but for various
reasons I wasn't quite comfortable with any of them.
No previous version and not even XP's Notepad handles Unix LF's correctly. But
since I found out the quick and easy WordPad method I mentioned a couple of days
ago, it's a very little problem to me now. So personally, I could live with the
CRLF requirement being dropped, it's not that big a deal anytime, but I'm
thankful that it hasn't been done yet.
/Tore
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Jim DeVona wrote:
> So, because I am a geek, and because I was curious about the practical reasons
> for the DOS line ending requirement, I conducted a relatively comprehensive
> compatibility inventory.
>
> http://anoved.net/2010/01/ldraw-line-endings/
Sweet! It's pretty cool just to see the list of screenshots. Thanks for
putting that together, it was a neat read.
> My conclusion is essentially that this is as it should be - we have a format
> that preserves compatibility with older components, and tools that are robust
> enough to understand reasonable exceptions to the format.
Exactly.
> Also, wow - as I started collecting screenshots and trying out less familiar
> programs, it became evident just how much interesting LDraw software there is. I
> think this is great news for the community, and something for the developers
> (and the Jessimans) to be proud of.
:)
Steve
|
|
|
