CAD Development : 8446


CAD / Development / 8446	8445 \| 8447

Subject:	Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
Newsgroups:	lugnet.cad.dev
Date:	Sun, 16 Mar 2003 00:07:05 GMT
Viewed:	1870 times

In lugnet.cad.dev, Travis Cobbs writes: <snip> > Here is my suggestion (just a suggestion, mind you). All future > meta-commands could look like the following: > > 0 {META} <command> [arguments] > > Where the "0 {META} " signifies a meta-command (the spaces are both > required, but can be repeated), <command> is whatever the name of your > meta-command is, and [arguments] is the optional list of arguments. I like this suggestion a lot. It solves most of the problems we've been discussing about namespace pollution. -Orion

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
(...) Having read the other replies to this post, I feel that--no matter how well-intentioned--putting a lock on new meta-commands is both wrong and impractical. The simple fact is that all LDraw-based development is done voluntarily. As such, it's (...) (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

Custom Search