Subject:
|
Re: Ghost bug in 3.11
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.mlcad
|
Date:
|
Wed, 3 Nov 2004 17:08:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
8337 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.mlcad, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> Did you use 1.1.5 and the -mf or -mF options? I know these options make
> ldglite ignore STEP.
Didn't try those, though I doubt they'd make it ignore CLEAR.
> The step dats that LPub makes do have STEP and ROTSTEP, but eliminate buffer
> exchage and clear and such, before passing the step dat to ldglite.
Sounds good to me.
> > Well it turns out, you can ghost meta instructions just fine in MLCad, but it
> > never saves them as ghosted. The only way to ghost them properly is to manually
> > edit the .mpd file in a text editor. MLCad recognizes on load that they're
> > supposed to be ghosted, but once you make any changes they go back to normal. So
> > MLCad is saving ghosted meta commands as unghosted.
>
> I don't think you want to GHOST out those commands. This is not what GHOST is
> supposed to be used for. In MLCAD you might want to preceed these commands with
> WRITE (which MLCAD uses to mean comment), also // would also work.
I'm not sure I follow why ghosting these would be a bad idea. Since ghosting is
only supposed to hide something if it's not the main model, ghosting ROTSTEP and
STEP and CLEAR would cause no different behavior in MLCad, but would prevent
programs like ldglite from incorrectly executing them in a submodel.
> As Don has indicated, he is already looking at this code.
Good to hear.
> > While I'm at it, any chance for some new meta-commands? I think these would be
> > lovely:
> >
> > 0 MLCAD CALLOUT [number] [part or submodel]
> > 0 MLCAD CALLOUT BUILD [number] [submodel]
> >
> > The number would be shown as 2x, 3x, etc. in the corner of the callout diagram
> > (ignoring 0 or 1). The BUILD option would show the entire submodel as a callout,
> > step by step. In either case the part or submodel would also include position
> > and rotation info, though position would be relative to the default placement in
> > the box.
>
> MLCAD would have to make a *lot* of assumptions based on the scant info you
> propose above. How will MLCAD know when to put in dividers? How will MLCAD
> know whether the dividers are horizontal or vertical? How ill MLCAD know what
> kinds of margins to use between steps, steps and step numbers, steps and
> dividers?
Yep, I figured there wasn't enough info provided. But most of the point, I
think, is to show that a callout is wanted in a specific place in the model. The
dimensions of the box don't matter to that end; that sort of thing is mostly the
domain of preference settings, or in a second meta command.
Dividers and margins I don't think are critical choices. Most simple callouts
simply don't use dividers, and margin calculations can be automatic based on the
scale and the boundaries of the parts. Scale should naturally be based on the
current step, but it could be slightly larger if the step is scaled way down
(i.e., minimum distance (perspective) or maximum scale (orthographic) would be
respected).
> Do you want nested callouts (sub-submodels called out by submodels which are
> called out at some level?)
I'm thinking of something less complex than LPub's nesting system (although I
think they could be compatible, since submodels could use this command), mostly
meant for very simple submodels. It could also be used to display a piece from a
different angle, like for example a castle wall with a brick pattern, so readers
of the instructions would know specifically which piece to put there. (Better
still would be yet another meta command that placed such a box directly above
where the part is placed. The only caveat is that such a box couldn't cover any
part added in the current step.) In one step of my model I've got a slope brick
45 2x2 double convex, of which I use 3 in that step, but they all face away from
the view angle. A simple box that shows the part at the desired angle and a "3x"
would be enough.
I'm quite curious to see though how LPub's new callout meta commands will work,
though. As long as some tool is doing it, I'm happy.
Lummox JR
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Ghost bug in 3.11
|
| (...) <snip> (...) Pardon LPub's use of CALLOUT in meta-commands. Perhaps I chose too generic a term, but...... The term is there and I thing it would be a very *bad* thing to have callout mean one thing in LPub and a totally different thing in (...) (20 years ago, 3-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
| | | Re: Ghost bug in 3.11
|
| (...) The thing is, that STEP and ROTSTEP are implicitly ghosted for a given sub-model used in a model. When you are generating images for the sub-model itself, STEP and ROTSTEP have meaning and affect the generated images. When you add the (...) (20 years ago, 3-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Ghost bug in 3.11
|
| (...) Did you use 1.1.5 and the -mf or -mF options? I know these options make ldglite ignore STEP. The step dats that LPub makes do have STEP and ROTSTEP, but eliminate buffer exchage and clear and such, before passing the step dat to ldglite. (...) (...) (20 years ago, 3-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
6 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
|
|
|
|
