 | | Re: 11-16 primitives? —Steve Bliss
|
| | | (...) 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? —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | 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)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: 11-16 primitives? —Don Heyse
|
| | | | (...) 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)
|
| | | | |
