Special:
|
[DAT] (requires LDraw-compatible viewer)
|
Subject:
|
Multiple MovedTo Arguments Really Legal?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Fri, 5 Mar 2004 16:34:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
939 times
|
| |
|
|
In 973p11.dat the first line reads:
0 ~Moved to 973p1a, 973p1b, 973p1c
L3P can obviously handle this correctly, but my utility movedto.exe for one,
treats the input like this:
1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 973p11.dat
is altered to:
1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 973p1a, 973p1b, 973p1c.dat
Not very good...
Is there any spec supporting this strange usage?
Is it really LDraw compatible? Or will original LDraw and other renderers have
similar problems as my utilities?
/Tore
(Btw, how is it supposed to be interpreted???)
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Multiple MovedTo Arguments Really Legal?
|
| (...) You are not supposed to actually use the information in the comment, it's only informational. The ~ tells mklist to ignore this part. Just ignore the line, the following line type 1 will automatically redirect you to the new part. /Lars (21 years ago, 5-Mar-04, to lugnet.cad)
| | | Re: Multiple MovedTo Arguments Really Legal?
|
| (...) Sorry, Tore, but this usage was unavoidable. This isn't a normal part-move, the migration from 973p11 to 973p1a, 973p1b, and 973p1c is fixing an anomoly in the parts library. 973p11 is coded so that the undecorated surfaces of the part are a (...) (21 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
|
|
|
|
