Subject:
|
Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Sun, 16 Mar 2003 15:44:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2013 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Dan Boger writes:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 06:22:40AM +0000, Travis Cobbs wrote:
> > > Another suggestion Kevin kicked around with me (and I mentioned it to Steve,
> > > I forget his rection though), was introducing a new line type specifically
> > > for meta-commands. Thoughts on that?
> >
> > Well, I don't know about other programs, but LDView will throw them in the
> > error log, but otherwise ignore them. It would be really easy for me to add
> > support for the new type and not throw them in the error log, though.
> >
> > One downside of a new line type is that I think we would need to wait for
> > fairly wide-spread tool support of the new line type before we could
> > reasonably make it "official".
>
> besides, if we add a new linetype, we're breaking LDRAW.EXE and
> LEDIT.EXE, wouldn't we?
Yup, LEdit chokes on it, just tried it out using unused line type 9 with
text after it. D'oh.
> > If non-programmers think the braces make it too difficult to enter by hand,
> > I'm comfortable with not having them, and just using 0 META to specify
> > meta-commands.
>
> I'm sorry, I can't understand why it's "too difficult" to enter {} by
> hand. It's on the standard keyboard. The people who actually edit
> stuff by hand have the requirement of knowing how to use a keyboard :)
> I mean, when SMTP format was design, you think they were worried that
> people will have a hard time typing "@"? *grin*
I know how to use a keyboard. I'm talking convenience on the part of someone
editing by hand. {} isn't necessary, so why add it to the mix?
> > > Nevertheless - I do think RIGHT NOW the focus should be on documenting what
> > > we have, per Kevin's goals, and LATER we should worry about the future of
> > > meta-commands. One thing at a time.
> >
> > This seems reasonable. However, news threads (including this branch of this
> > one) can't really easily be put on hold.
>
> Also, most of us don't really have anything to contribute to the
> documentation process - it's up to the program authors to supply the
> data. Meanwhile, the community as a whole can consider and design the
> future of the format here :)
Sure.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
