 | | Should *all* studs use a STUD primitive? —Anders Isaksson
| | | | I'm in the process of updating my LDList program, including stud count as a searchable parameter. During tests I have found a couple of parts that have studs, but are not using any STUD primitive, and for this reason LDList cannot find them :-( At (...) (20 years ago, 26-Mar-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Should *all* studs use a STUD primitive? —Chris Dee
| | | | | (...) primitives. Maybe the authors (Matt Schild, Franklin Cain, Steve Bliss) could comment. Rather than 3626bp00, which is not an official part, I think you mean s/3626bs00 which does have an inlined stud. I think this should be fixed too. Chris (20 years ago, 27-Mar-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Should *all* studs use a STUD primitive? —Steve Bliss
| | | | | (...) ... I was high that day? ... no, that seems pretty unlikely ... I think these should all be changed. Some/most would probably be candidates for the special STUD.DAT notation (ie, all caps), to signify no stud-as-line rendering. Steve (20 years ago, 30-Mar-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | |
