 | | re-name "patterned" parts?... —Franklin W. Cain
|
| | | People, I've noticed a minor problem with the current way of naming/titling "petterned" parts. Here's a brief excerpt from PARTS.LST (sorted by Description): 3070.DAT Tile 1 x 1 2555.DAT Tile 1 x 1 with Clip 3070DISP.DAT Tile 1 x 1 with Computer (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: re-name "patterned" parts?... —Jeff Boen
|
| | | | | (...) in addition.. something that I've been curious about.. why are the names (descriptions) in this format?: [type] <space> # <space> x <space> <space> # why the second space after the times sign? I've removed it from some of my updated parts, (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: re-name "patterned" parts?... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | (...) Because of parts like "baseplate 16 x 16" which need two character spaces? Without the padding you'd get ragged listings in monospace font reports. Just a guess, I am just a gadfly here. ++Lar (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: re-name "patterned" parts?... —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) My impression has been that the extra space preserves alphabetical listing by description, so that Brick 2 x 4 comes before Brick 2 x 10. Another gadfly, Dave! (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: re-name "patterned" parts?... —Jennifer L. Boger
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I'm guessing it's so they'll sort in human readable format... ie: brick 1 x 1 brick 1 x 2 brick 2 x 10 brick 2 x 12 would be instead (in computer numeralical order (as i like to call it when i complain to dan)) brick 1 x 1 brick 1 x 10 brick 1 (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: re-name "patterned" parts?... —Franklin W. Cain
|
| | | | | | | | Yup, that'd be why. ;-) Actually, those one-digit numbers are in reality *two*-digit numbers, prefaced with a zero, but since the zero in question is invisible, you don't see it. ;-) Franklin (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: re-name "patterned" parts?... —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | (...) You realize you answered your own question? The spacing was inherited from James Jessiman, but it works better to have it there. If some programs/people don't want the spaces, it's easy enough to delete them. It would be more challenging to (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: re-name "patterned" parts?... —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | (...) This would do what you want, unless there was another, similar part, whose name is the same as the master part, except the final dimension included a fractional part, such as "... 2 & 1/3". Not that this is something that commonly collides (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: re-name "patterned" parts?... —Franklin W. Cain
|
| | | | (...) Good point. I've only dealt with one part, so far, that this became an issue with: the (Minifig) Witch's Cauldron. But that one measured at "1/2" (inn between the plates for "1/3" and "2/3"), so I just used decimals (i.e., ".5"). If it had (...) (24 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | |
