Subject:
|
Re: Line in the Sand
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:40:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3022 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve:
> > [ Still discussing http://www.geocities.com/partsref/bfcspec.txt ]
> > certification = "0" "CERTIFY" ( "BFC" | "NOBFC" ) { certification_flag }
> > winding = "0" "WINDING" ( "CW" | "CCW" | "UNKNOWN" )
> > clipping = "0" "CLIPPING" ( "ON" | "OFF" )
> > invert = "0" "INVERT"
>
> You'll pardon me if I use an abbreviated notation, and skip the "
> characters.
Yes.
> > > > This sounds correct, but do we want to eliminate this
> > > > syntactic sugar?
> > >
> > > why not ?
> >
> > I like it.
>
> It's hard to argue with that.
The argument against should be that it complicates the
rendering significantly, but I don't think it does.
Play well,
Jacob
------------------------------------------------
-- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk --
-- Web...: <URL:http://www.ldraw.org/FAQ/> --
------------------------------------------------
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Line in the Sand
|
| (...) You'll pardon me if I use an abbreviated notation, and skip the " characters. (...) It's hard to argue with that. Steve (25 years ago, 9-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
85 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
