To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.devOpen lugnet.cad.dev in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Development / 8572 (-20)
  Re: Latest BFC Spec?
 
(...) Don't forget, as per this post ((URL) I'm resetting all the numbers in the current document to 1 prior to making my new changes. --Travis Cobbs (tcobbs@REMOVE.halibut.com) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
 
(...) I agree. I don't think a program can be "compatible" with an organization. It can be "certified" by one, though: LDraw.org-Certified. Of course, this might have stronger implications than LDraw.org-compatible. On the other hand, maybe that's a (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Calling all Meta-commands
 
(...) Ok... I'll throw it on the to-do list to dig up the poll documentation and change it. Lazy me! -Tim (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Calling all Meta-commands
 
(...) not that anyone ever heard of it, but ESQL (IBM language for MQSI) uses double hyphen for comments. That said, if I had to choose between '--' and '//', I'd go with the slashes. oooh - here's an idea. We could change the Ldraw.org poll (which (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
 
(...) Sorry, 'LDraw.org-compatible programs'. Which is poor terminology, I think. Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Latest BFC Spec?
 
(...) I never imagined those numbers would be a permanent part of the document. I thought they'd go away once we accepted the BFC standard. But that never actually happened, so the document was never finalized, so the numbers never went away. When (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Calling all Meta-commands
 
(...) Hmm, the sequel to a hyphen... I like hyphen or double hyphen because they contrast more with the surrounding text. I agree with Kevin, anything's better than nothing. Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Calling all Meta-commands
 
(...) Travis, By definition, all the programs have to be able to handle the original unadorned comments of type 0 records. This is a requirement for all 0.27 compliant programs. This means that anything we don't recognize as a meta-command is a (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Calling all Meta-commands
 
(...) Steve, *anything* is better than nothing. Trying to read a DAT/LDR program that has *lots* of comments with interspersed meta-commands is really hard. I've programmed for 30 years, and I've never seen hyphen used as a start of comment. I guess (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
 
(...) LDraw compatible, or LDraw.org compatible? ;-) You made a distinction before -- are you using the same metric now as well? Just curious. -Tim (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Calling all Meta-commands
 
(...) I've been avoiding weighing in on this issue but.. How about a double hyphen, '--' -Orion (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
 
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) The point of setting an 'LDraw.org Compatible' format would be to set the framework of LDraw files, not to restrict what can be in LDraw files. If a programmer wants to implement thier (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Latest BFC Spec?
 
(...) Do we really need to put the revision number next to every line? I find that astheically annoying. The way we do it in Nuke land is put a heavy black line in the margin next to all the lines that changed from the last revision. -Orion (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
 
(...) I was trying to refrain from posting too many messages on issues that had already been cleared up. Besides, I'm trying to collect my thoughts on the SB for a single post. Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
 
(...) Not really. The important thing with the parts library is that files are accepted and added the distribution file. We don't even have a '0 Official' any more - now it's '0 LDRAW_ORG'. I was envisioning the 'LDraw.org Compatible' program to be (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Calling all Meta-commands
 
(...) I agree. (...) What's wrong with -? Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Latest BFC Spec?
 
(...) I think that's all right. (...) Hey, it looked like so much fun ... I don't think you were around for the old days. I might not have replied to every message in .cad, but it was close to that. Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Latest BFC Spec?
 
(...) I think it could, in models and unofficial stuff. But I don't think it would be useful in the official parts library. Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: The DOS apps (was Re: Backwards Compatibility)
 
(...) Make sure you've installed LDRAW027.EXE -- that should resolve the runtime 200 problem. Steve (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
 
But, isn't that more-or-less exactly what happens with the parts library? (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR