 | | Re: DAT format question
|
|
Bram Lambrecht wrote in message <19990921.200045.509...no.com>... (...) My experience has been that as flexibility increases, complexity increases. I'm usually quite anal about coding objects to always behave in a very structured, predictable (...) (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT format question
|
|
(...) Why not? I've done this when a part didn't exist (I used a box.dat for the center of the 1x2x2 shock absorber) (...) Part developers often use different colors to make sure shapes are matching up correctly. Also, atterned parts and some other (...) (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT format question
|
|
(...) Probably too restrictive. Most (I think) part developers design their parts in the models directory to keep them separate from the official parts. Mock-ups and crude outlines of parts should also be kept out of the parts directory. I like the (...) (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT format question
|
|
Would it be too restrictive of my CAD program to require that all parts (and nothing but parts) are stored in the parts and parts/s directories, and all primitives (and nothing but primitives) are stored in the p directory? Models could exist (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT format question
|
|
Gary Williams wrote in message ... (...) with. Doh', this wouldn't be a complete solution, either. If the user opens a model, I'd still have to determine which external references in it are parts and which are embedded models/subassemblies. And if (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT format question
|
|
(...) I don't see that as being that big a deal, really. And if you could have some kind of button on a toolbar for each of them, all the better. (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT format question
|
|
My original plans called for my CAD package to distinguish among the various kinds of DAT file. This would allow the program to know when it was appropriate to enable certain editing features. For example, it shouldn't allow the user to add (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Suggestions for developers of LCAD programs
|
|
(...) Short cuts for turning 90 degrees around x or z would be great too. (A for 90 degree turn around y axis, S around x, D around z maybe?) (...) alternatives (...) That reminds me, another good feature is the Start-at-Line option. (...) So do I, (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unsubscribing
|
|
(...) If you signed up manually, go here: (URL) simply reverse what you did earlier. But if you transferred over by default from the former L-CAD mailing list, which it looks like you did, then drop me a note (just reply to this message) and I'll (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Limiting pieces (was: Re: File format for set inventories?)
|
|
(...) Wow, that would be neat-o. I could really use something like that when planning monorail layouts. I know exactly how many of each piece I have, and, unlike, say, red 2x4 bricks, I can't just go out and get more without extreme difficulty. So, (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
