Subject:
|
Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Mon, 14 Nov 2005 21:55:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2496 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
| |
I agree and disagree with this.
I disagree because the dat and ldr extensions do not indicate the type of
content in the file (except that it’s an LDraw file). I imagine if we ever
break backwards compatibility in the part library, we’ll switch all the files
to .LDR extensions.
|
I agree with that - it’s much easier for the user to eliminate such conflicts
(eg call the set file set-926.ldr) than expect the software to make such
decisions for you.
ROSCO
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
| (...) Actually, there's really no easy way to do part detection, but filenames really aren't a good idea. I'm pretty sure Lars is fully aware of the part detection problem (since it also affects the seams option in L3P), and there have been (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
| I agree and disagree with this. I agree that it would be good (for now) if L3P only substituted LGEO parts for files with a .dat extension. Or, even better, if (a) the file being substituted has the UNOFFICIAL/LDRAWORG meta-statement and states it (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
19 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
|
|
|
|
