Subject:
|
Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Tue, 17 Oct 2000 20:33:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
667 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
> > Longer term, we are going to need a different, better solution for this.
> > Anyone have any suggestions?
>
> I can't remember the last time "dropping DOS support" came up, but it seems
> like a very long time ago! Is "real DOS" (not real-mode DOS :o) still really
> something that needs to be supported? I understand that DOS as a filesystem
> format needs to be supported, but since Micros~1 added the ~ thingie in file
> names, "DOS" (e.g., pre-NTFS Windows) could support long filenames.
>
> Does anyone still use an old version of PKZIP that won't support filenames
> longer than 8.3?
>
> Does anyone still run DOS the OS? (Meaning real, actual DOS -- like 5.0,
etc.)
Don't LDRAW and LEDIT run in "real DOS" mode? They won't understand
the long filenames even if you run them from within windows. I'm pretty
sure some folks still use LEDIT.
How about replacing the .dat extension with the pattern number for these
filenames? (Something like 3626bp.101)
Don
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
| (...) Oh yeah! It's my fav modeling tool. I seem to remember that Jeremy Sproat also said he used LEdit. (...) But will that work in LEdit? I normally specify part names in LEdit by the base file name, i.e. everything before the ".DAT" and LEdit (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
| (...) I'd rather not encode file-nameish data into the file-extension. That feels like a bad thing to do -- extensions indicate the *type* of file, not the specific file. I realize that "DAT" is not the greatest extension in the world, as it's far (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
| (...) I can't remember the last time "dropping DOS support" came up, but it seems like a very long time ago! Is "real DOS" (not real-mode DOS :o) still really something that needs to be supported? I understand that DOS as a filesystem format needs (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
25 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
|
|
|
|
