Subject:
|
Re: Should *all* studs use a STUD primitive?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Tue, 30 Mar 2004 03:35:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1871 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Chris Dee wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Anders Isaksson wrote:
> > At least the following parts have studs, but don't use a STUD primitive
> > (inlined studs?):
> >
> > 208.dat
> > 476.dat
> > 577.dat
> > 3626bp00.dat
>
> I see no immediate reason why these should not use the stud2 or stud2a
> primitives. Maybe the authors (Matt Schild, Franklin Cain, Steve Bliss) could
> comment.
... 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
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Should *all* studs use a STUD primitive?
|
| (...) 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)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
