Subject:
|
Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Sat, 15 Mar 2003 03:04:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1522 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Ahui Herrera writes:
> > 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?
Yes.
> 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.
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 document the spec and construct a system within which to advance the
file format before say publishing a new version.
I think you could ask almost anyone here and they would say
backwards-compatibility is a must. That isn't a bad thing, so long as we
build a framework for legitimate advancement of the format in the future.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
| (...) I agree the backward compatibility is good, to a point. This is especially true for the parts library. Too many times we refuse to fix something or extend the file spec (e.g. new colors not able to be represented by existing color numbers) (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
| (...) ... and no. IMO, if the meta statement isn't listed in the current file format document, it's open to change. The meta-commands on that document (pulling from memory): STEP, PRINT, WRITE, SAVE (?!), (I gave up, dug out the code) PAUSE, CLEAR, (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Calling all 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 (...) (22 years ago, 15-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
|
|
|
|
