 | | Re: Problems with LDCfgalt.ldr and between LDConfig.ldr and LDDP
|
|
(...) I was wondering what this file was for. I wish I had known, as I really prefer colored edges. I have been providing a colored edge LDconfig file with my software that converts it for MLCAD use: (URL) you want to give my file a try, would it (...) (15 years ago, 30-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with LDCfgalt.ldr and between LDConfig.ldr and LDDP
|
|
(...) People? You mean person. I think the only real reason for creating that file in the first place was to hush my whining about boring colors. (URL) got a nice laugh from the delicious irony of stealthily replacing the shiny candy colors with the (...) (15 years ago, 30-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Quirks with Peeron part inventory images
|
|
(...) FYI, this problem now appears to be resolved - I now see the correct part images in the inventory mentioned above. Thanks, Jim (15 years ago, 30-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
(...) In the mklist beta I posted there's an undocumented -r switch to turn off the ragged edges and make room for 25 char filenames. There's also an undocumented -t to twiddle with the 78 vs 80 character line formats. But there's nothing yet for (...) (15 years ago, 29-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
Sorry to follow-up my own post, but I did a quick test on MLCAD. (...) I had a DUH! moment after posting the previous message. If MLCAD can use a ragged format file, of course it can use a fixed-25 format file. DOH. (...) I prepared a PARTS.LST file (...) (15 years ago, 29-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | mklist 1.6beta1
|
|
(...) I'm assuming the 80 char lines is what you're aiming for here, so based on the 64 char limit on descriptions I started the descriptions on the 16th character of the line. That gives room for a 15 character name and a single space before the (...) (15 years ago, 29-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with LDCfgalt.ldr and between LDConfig.ldr and LDDP
|
|
(...) I seem to remember that part of the reason to have LDCfgalt.ldr was for people who prefer the colored edge lines. Actually, it seems like that was a big part of the reason to have the file. So why drop that functionality? Steve (15 years ago, 29-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
(...) My thinking is the 'ragged' format has the least impact - if there are no long part nambers, then the output PARTS.LST would exactly match the classic format, without the user having to know anything about long/short part nambers. Of course, (...) (15 years ago, 29-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with LDCfgalt.ldr and between LDConfig.ldr and LDDP
|
|
(...) LDCfgalt.ldr has been kept for backwards compatibility but colors have been substituted with grey to encourage the shift to the new LDConfig.ldr file and colors. w. (15 years ago, 29-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Problems with LDCfgalt.ldr and between LDConfig.ldr and LDDP
|
|
I noticed two issues with the new versions of LDConfig.ldr: - LDCfgalt.ldr contains only grey colors (#c1c1c1) with black edge. Though I never used LDCfgalt this seems weird to me. - When I install the new LDConfig.ldr, LDDP replacement feature is (...) (15 years ago, 29-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad)
|
