 | | Re: Official Parts using MLCad colors
|
|
(...) Let me stop this before it gets started... It's not an offense, Tore, nor were you wrong at the time. There is no witch hunt, finger pointing, or conspiracy. We are not on a crusade against you or anyone else. We simply want to upgrade the (...) (15 years ago, 2-Oct-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Official Parts using MLCad colors
|
|
(...) It appears so, even if I wish it was just the opposite. I still haven't been convinced why it is so wrong to use the backwards compatible color number range when possible. I used color 462 for the orange part of the German flag because number (...) (15 years ago, 1-Oct-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Official Parts using MLCad colors
|
|
(...) Hi, All these colors are in the 'dithered' range, if the actual dither color is wanted by the part author it has nothing to do with mlcad or has it? And isn't declaring new colors in the LDConfig using the dithered range breaking some kind of (...) (15 years ago, 1-Oct-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Official Parts using MLCad colors
|
|
(...) There may be problems matching these colors. As you note, these are patterned parts and the colors Lego uses for the printing on patterned parts do not necessarily match the colors used for the plastic brick. -Orion (15 years ago, 1-Oct-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Official Parts using MLCad colors
|
|
(...) When we updated the LDConfig.ldr 462 was already defined as Medium_Orange #FE9F06 and has therefore been kept. If Medium_Orange is appropriate for the German Flag is another story. The chart only list colors which are used in parts but are not (...) (15 years ago, 1-Oct-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Official Parts using MLCad colors
|
|
(...) How about color 462 in 777p01.dat? (15 years ago, 30-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Official Parts using MLCad colors
|
|
Hi, Scott Wardlaw has written a prog which matches the colors used in the official parts against the now updated LDConfig.ldr colors chart. This is a list of parts that use colors which were mainly defined in MLCad and have never been LDraw colors: (...) (15 years ago, 30-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | 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: 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: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
(...) Yeah, I was actually planning a -f to force it to finish and -q for quiet. (...) For now I've added a -8 to make it use the 8.3 format. As per Travis' suggestion it converts to the canonical short form under Windows. The function uppercases (...) (15 years ago, 28-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
(...) For MLCAD it doesn't matter. Steve said that MLCAD worked fine with long filenames inside parts.lst. The only reason to put the short filename in is for other programs that might have problems with the long filename. And as long as mklist is (...) (15 years ago, 27-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
(...) Sounds easy, but I think nobody can read that short filenames that would appear in the MLCad list!? cu mikeheide (15 years ago, 27-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
(...) If it's running in Windows, I think a backwards-compatible switch should use the Win32 API to get the short filename (with the ~1 at the end, usually, determined using PathGetShortPath) and use that in place of the long filename. --Travis (15 years ago, 27-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
(...) That would be good, I think. (...) Can you have two levels? Level One that still shows the warnings, but doesn't stop, and Level Two suppresses all warnings. (...) I'd keep the current line-format for all parts conforming to the 8.3 format, (...) (15 years ago, 27-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
(...) I could update the mklist sources to work handle filenames with 25 chars I was going to add a quietmode commandline option this weekend anyhow. Should I allow 25 chars as the default, and perhaps include an optional command line arg to (...) (15 years ago, 25-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
(...) If I understand that, this would mean that we could use a new mklist tool and we can start using that long filenames. The possibility to use MLCad for generating PARTS.LST will be away, but this only a little cut. cu mikeheide (15 years ago, 25-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
(...) Were any other issues anticipated? (...) I did a short test of MLCAD with a modified PARTS.LST. The results were mixed - MLCAD seems OK using an altered-format PARTS.LST file, but re-generating PARTS.LST from MLCAD results in an invalid file. (...) (15 years ago, 25-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: 11-16 primitives?
|
|
(...) When the LSC updated the spec to allow 21.3 filenames, I don't think any of us were aware that this would create a problem for PARTS.LST. However, looking at the file, there's a chance that MLCAD will work perfectly well with longer filenames (...) (15 years ago, 25-Sep-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
