 | | Re: A comprehensive LDraw object model
|
| (...) > (Maybe not too much, let's keep it lean and mean.) At the least, I > think we should make the object model workable in C++, Java, Perl and > Python. (...) This is interesting. I wonder what we can do as far as making it both comprehensive (...) (23 years ago, 10-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: A comprehensive LDraw object model
|
| (...) I'll have a better answer for this when I port my Java implementation to Perl. But yah, I guess "comprehensive" and "generic" don't quite mix well. I want comprehensive, in that this library could be used for many different methods of (...) (23 years ago, 10-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: A comprehensive LDraw object model
|
| (...) I can definately see the benefits of a standard library interface. Even an implementation might have a lot of uses. I just think that you will get the best design for the interface, if you forget about how you or anyone implemented it in the (...) (23 years ago, 10-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
