Subject:
|
Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Mon, 14 Nov 2005 22:50:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2408 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
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.
|
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
discussions in the past about good methods to use.
Part detection would be MUCH simpler if every file in the official library was
updated to include a meta-comment stating that they’re official, and then
requiring unofficial parts to have some other meta-comment. The problem is that
a large number of official files don’t have any comments in them that can be
recognized by software, so the file’s source directory has to also be used.
--Travis
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
| (...) 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 (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
|
|
|
|
