Subject:
|
Re: Getting rif off the 8.3 nomenclature???
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Wed, 28 Mar 2007 17:25:01 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4879 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> I know that given the way LPub and LSynth are written and the language libraries
> used, switching away from the 8.3 limitation represents a significant amount of
> work.
This suprises me. Can you elaborate on this? If we in the LSC are going to
make an informed decision on this issue, understanding why this is the case with
LPub/LSynth would help us greatly. I know all Win32 API calls work fine with
long filenames, and I had assumed that Delphi worked fine with them also. (LPub
is Delphi C++, right?)
--Travis
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Getting rif off the 8.3 nomenclature???
|
| (...) Call me paranoid, but long filenames make me nervous because of the other worms packaged along with them (like unicode or UTF-8, blech!). Sure your filenames might look great on Windows, but try to bring them over to another filesystem, or (...) (18 years ago, 28-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Getting rif off the 8.3 nomenclature???
|
| (...) Willy, I agree completely on this point. That is why the LSC created the LDraw file format specification 1.0.0. I have never used LDraw myself, but I know that for some very influential people in the LDraw community this is an issue. I did not (...) (18 years ago, 28-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
