Subject:
|
Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Sat, 15 Mar 2003 02:32:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1345 times
|
| |
|
|
> For better or worse, we're now stuck with the orginal LDraw meta-commands,
> and effectively stuck with the meta-commands that are already in use (for
> BFC, MPD, etc). But, if we're going to try to decide how define good
> behavior for future meta-commands, I think we should come up with something
> that guarantees that legitimate comments aren't mistaken for meta-commands.
Are we REALLY stuck with current meta-commands? Sure if we change them all
(the META Statements) after setting up a "body of standards" our old files
may not work but somewhere down the future is it NOT better to NOT worry
about backward compatibale and worry about creating a NEW better format? I
know that Tim is going to go YUK on this idea of non-backwards compatiable,
but I would rather see a proper solution then anoth band-aid on our LDraw
format.
-AHui
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
| (...) Yes. (...) I think we'll see coming out of this discussion something that will prevent the meta-command chaos we've seen for the past years. No one here is talking about a new file format, or new version of a spec - yet. First we need to fully (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
| Having read through this thread, I've seen a lot of good points made. However, it also appears that people haven't really fully thought about the implications of meta-commands. It's very important to realize that meta-commands are presented as (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
154 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
