To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.devOpen lugnet.cad.dev in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Development / 3037
3036  |  3038
Subject: 
Re: Interpreting the proposed FACE meta-command
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.dev
Date: 
Mon, 4 Oct 1999 22:41:43 GMT
Viewed: 
938 times
  
Steve Bliss wrote in message <37f8c4a9.238320530@lugnet.com>...
Why not recognize it all ways:

0 FACE ACW
0 FACE ANTICLOCKWISE


Well, I have nothing against anticlockwise, but it's redundant.  Seeing ACW
where one expects CW or CCW may confuse some people.  I checked the
dictionary because I honestly didn't think Webster would have it (but it
did...though I've never once heard it used before).

-Gary



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Interpreting the proposed FACE meta-command
 
(...) Why not recognize it all ways: 0 FACE ACW 0 FACE ANTICLOCKWISE 0 FACE CCW 0 FACE CLOCKWISE 0 FACE COUNTERCLOCKWISE 0 FACE CW 0 FACE DOUBLESIDED 0 FACE DS 0 FACE UNKNOWN This adds a bit to the parser, but not so much. The recommended standard (...) (25 years ago, 4-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

56 Messages in This Thread:
















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR