 | | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) I believe Lar mad the case that the SB can/should include people from all camps. I for the most part agree, because we need perspectives from the various types of people who create [elements of] and use this system. -Tim (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Charter Org for LDraw.org (was: Re: LDraw Versioning (Was Re: Backwards Compatibility))
|
|
(...) Cool. I put 'nonprofit' in to emphasize the nature of the organization. While I've taken a cursory look at information on "nonprofit corporations," I'm not totally aware of alternatives. Obviously, we want to travel down the route that creates (...) (22 years ago, 22-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)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) can snag a copy of that. Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) Right. But newer OS's and video cards are becoming less compatible with DOS programs, especially DOS programs that do graphics. I used to be able to run LDraw with Super-VGA resolutions (with Win95, I think). I haven't been able to that in (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Hmm. To tell you the truth, I don't remember. My main use for it is to make sure patterns are rendered on the backside of transparent solids. I will *allow* that NOCLIP/CLIP can be used to allow non-compliant sections of code, but I don't feel (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Absolutely. :) The spec was never ratified or 'officially' accepted as a standard. Parts of it are have definitely evolved as the defacto standard, but that's not the same as having a good, documented standard to follow. I think the spec can (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) I could kind of see that, but not in the parts library. I would expect that any file in the library that specifies NOCLIP does it for a good reason, and should not be overrode (overridden?). What I could maybe see in the parts library is a (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) During the rendering process, it is necessary to keep track of both the 'accumulated clip-state' and the 'local clip-state'. The accumulated clip-state is logically equivalent to boolean ANDing the local clip-states of all the parent files. As (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Charter Org for LDraw.org (was: Re: LDraw Versioning (Was Re: Backwards Compatibility))
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Tim Courtney wrote: [snippity-do-dah] (...) Whoa there! There is a *huge* difference between a 'formal organization' and a 'formal nonprofit organization'. If you were using 'nonprofit' informally, please *don't*. 'nonprofit' (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) I agree. (...) Nit: we've already *got* an LDraw file format spec. Next item! (...) 'Control' is heavy-handed for my tastes. 'Support', 'endorse', 'coordinate' are all better. All a standards body could do is manage the documentation, and (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) Dan, You program in *Perl*. Of course you think it's good to always have punctuation. You probably think more punctuation == better. ;) Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) True, but that's no reason to have (unnecessary) complications. The computer will understand whatever we set it up to understand. LIGHTVALS, {LIGHTVALS}, 32.6, it's all the same to the silicon. Syntax is for users, beginning or advanced. If we (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) Depends on how open or closed the SB is. I think there's a place for part authors and users as well as developers. Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) Tim, I've been reading this thread, and you keep mentioning this 'Steve' person. 'Steve this' and 'Steve that'. I must have gone through 100 messages by now, and no 'Steve' has shown up. I'm beginning to suspect you are imagining this 'Steve' (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) I really agree with Dan on this point. As I mentioned in another message, a standards body could certainly come up with suggestions for standard commands, but they wouldn't have any power of enforcement. About the only thing ldraw.org could[1] (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Because it wouldn't be supported by LDraw and LEdit. Part files frequently include comments, so any standard option for commenting should be allowable in the parts library. (...) Some people already use COMMENT. Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Rosco, Unfortunately, MLCAD's use of WRITE is a really bad example, because MLCAD is mis-using an already standard meta-command. Plus, 0 WRITE statements are not allowed in official parts, so any part authors who create their files in MLCAD (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) I support that (general) guideline. The only real difficulty is if the meta-command becomes generally accepted, and is 'promoted' to being an accepted standard. We'd either want a different prefix for org standards, or no prefix. Either way (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) I agree with Larry -- support it publically. Recognize '0 LTrax xxxx' as the primary syntax for the command. Especially, let the author of the original command know that you are implement their command. Hopefully, that will give them cause to (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Did you flag your changes? Basically, you should have changed the rev to 11 (and updated the modification date). And put an 11 on the left side of any lines you changed. Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | The DOS apps (was Re: Backwards Compatibility)
|
|
Lars Hassing wrote: > Ryan Farrington wrote: >>I have run into this problem with Windows XP, not so much with LEdit and >>LDraw--I use L3P more often. Thankfully, there is still a Win98 SE computer >>in the house! > > In Windows XP you can open a (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Standards Body Thoughts
|
|
Hi Chris - (...) I agree that one of you should be involved on this committee/board. (...) I'm a fan of real-time chat or phone, and while I won't be participating as a member of the board, encourage the members to use such methods. (...) Ok. Steve (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
Thanks Dan, I created page (URL) that has my current list of known meta-commands for LDraw 0.27 as well as those that have been invented since. Kevin (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) In Windows XP you can open a command prompt by selecting All Programs/Accessories/Command Prompt, or by typing "cmd" in the Run... dialog. /Lars (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) There are currently a number of flags that indicate that a file is a part. The official one is only present in files that have been updated since it was made official. However, this isn't a problem, since any BFC-certified part is guaranteed (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
I saved this thread for later reading, and I've got a few questions now. Sorry if I'm resurrecting something everyone thought was dead :D (...) Once the parts library is fully BFC certified, will there ever be a need to use CLIP or NOCLIP? I'm not (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) I like that. I think a clear indication that a comment is in fact a meta statement is needed. And I find "0 {META} " more distinct than (META), <META>, {BFC}, <BFC>, MODULENAME and whatever else has been suggested. But we're still stuck with (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Dan (& Todd?) - I wonder if it would be possible to add an option (similar to skip filter settings) which would allow the web interface user the choice of displaying dots on the message page for threads over 100 or not. The default could be (...) (22 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) just go here: (URL) you should see a "start this page" button. Then with a little bit of FTX (_really_ easy), you should be all set. FTX Guide: (URL) Dan Boger dan@peeron.com (22 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Hi Dan, I think that would be cool. Just let me know what to do. Kevin (22 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) sure you can :) (URL) Here is the first draft of a list of meta-commands. It is pretty rough (...) wow, very cool. I think this would go great in an FTX page - we could have it linked from the CAD sidebar, and have it easily updated... what do (...) (22 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
Hi All, Well, this topic has exceeded the 100 post mark! The bummer is that we can no longer see the tree view of the posts :^( Here is the first draft of a list of meta-commands. It is pretty rough format-wise, but at least it is a list. I'm still (...) (22 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) This is the approach that Michael Lachman on MLCAD. In an email, where he gave us permission to include his meta-command descriptions in our LDraw specification (yay!) he indicated that he has started to use MLCAD as his module name for all (...) (22 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | DAT Curves Plugin For LDDesignPad Version 2.5.1
|
|
(...) Ok. The rotation now centers on the Bounding Box center. Get it at: (URL) (22 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT Curves Plugin For LDDesignPad Version 2.5
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Travis Cobbs writes: <snip> (...) Actually I'm using a library I picked up trolling sourceforge for goodies. It's called GLScene and it does all the back end processing for me, all I have to do is declare and manipulate objects. I (...) (22 years ago, 18-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT Curves Plugin For LDDesignPad Version 2.5
|
|
(...) I'm working on that. I'm still learning the ropes with this GLScene library I'm using. (...) It's a debug button I forgot to remove. -Orion (22 years ago, 18-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
One approach to namespace management is to have format the commands like so: 0 MODULENAME COMMAND blah Authors would ask for a unique MODULENAME string to use, and prefix that in front of any "experimental" commands. For example, say I want to (...) (22 years ago, 18-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT Curves Plugin For LDDesignPad Version 2.5
|
|
(...) It worked fine for me. As mentioned in Philippe's reply (with different wording), it would be a lot easier of the rotation center were the center of the bounding box of the generated curved object. I did find the zoom, though. Is all your (...) (22 years ago, 18-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
