| |
Tore Eriksson wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
> >
> > I think the MPD standard should include scoping/visibility rules, so
> > FILEs in an mpd are only available from within that MPD, not from other
> > DAT/LDR/MPD files.
> I think so, too.
Me too. And originally, you actually had to split a MPD file
before you could view the contents. I would prefer that we
stick to this way of treating MPD files as if they are
splitted/unpacked before their content is processed.
> I see MPD files almost like ZIP files.
That is also very much like how they were designed.
> One more thing is that the more complicated we make the
> LCad file specs, the fewer programmers will be able to
> contribute.
And we don't want that.
> I'm already completely lost with some of the newer
> features.
Which ones?
Play well,
Jacob
--
Minifig scale animals:
http://jacob.sparre.dk/LEGO/Dyr/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: MPD spec
|
| (...) I disagree with this. Or, if we keep this approach for MPD, I'll want another standard language extension for embedding "macros" in LDraw files. I tend to view (and use) FILEs in MPD files as "subroutines", and I'd prefer they were designed to (...) (24 years ago, 6-Aug-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: MPD spec
|
| (...) I think so, too. I see MPD files almost like ZIP files. I know that there are differences, like inside WinZip you can generally only view standalone files without unzipping them first. (The reason I reignited this thread was I wanted to make (...) (24 years ago, 6-Aug-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
65 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- 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
|
|
|
|
