Subject:
|
Re: L3P Warnings
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.ray
|
Date:
|
Wed, 7 Jul 2010 23:20:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
37993 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.ray, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> I agree to some extent. But now it's there, like it or not. I have very little
> (if any?) use of it and yes it annoys me a little. The deleting of extra blank
> lines (used to group lines some way related to eachother) that makes the dat
> code a lot easier for me to read and get an overview of - is much more annoying
> IMO.
I'm guilty of that blank-space-deletion in my own parts, I confess. I do most
of my authoring in Excel, and sometimes it becomes helpful to sort by linetype.
This has the effect of stripping out the blank lines or at least moving them
around in a way that won't be helpful in future attempts at editing.
You're right, though--the header formatting is the fact, and it's almost
certainly here to stay. For good or ill...
> I can only partly agree with you here. Yes, it was part of the official reason,
> but as I understood it, a relatively small part. A more relevant reason was that
> POV is just one alternative format of many to export to, and that there were
> Blender, AutoCAD etc etc, should we then allow inline code for all alternatives?
> If so, the official DAT files would be very large. And noone knows when a more
> popular renderer takes over and outdates POV-Ray.
Ah, that's interesting. I fear that I missed that part of the discussion,
because the last time I listened in (a while ago, I admit) the big issue was
"it's not our code language." At the time, those other platforms were far less
popular among visible AFOLs than POV-Ray, so naturally POV-Ray was the big one.
And of course Lars' L3P had such a huge impact on the online LDraw rendering
that it sort of pushed POV-Ray to the forefront.
> But you are absolutely right about important format changes. The change that has
> affected my works far most is the syntax changes from L3P v1.3 to v1.4Beta.
> Because I don't want to be without the benefits of LDConfig support, I had to
> edit all of my patterned POV dats to comply with v1.4B.
LEdit is still my prefered LDraw editing platform, because I've never found
another one that worked as well for me, despite 13 years of searching. I'm a
bit dismayed that the new name format won't work well with the existing 16-bit
software, but I guess that's how it goes when you're a dinosaur.
> Nah, that sound a little like a conspiracy theory in my ears.
Obviously "They" have gotten to you!
> But this one I have to strongly agree with! There are a handful of issues
> besides inline POV-coding where I have had another point of view than the
> "establisment". Of course, my English is not perfect, and when I unfortunately
> become frustrated and upset, communication has been even more distorted. But
> anywho: I have felt so many times that my input is neglected or dismissed before
> they are even carefully read. The starting point of the discussions have always
> been that I am wrong, I am using the wrong approach, a vintage PC, wrong
> software, and I have to be guided into the correct path. Or at least so I have
> felt. Of course, I have been wrong at times! But many times I have had to
> explain over and over again why I as an end-user sometimes prefer or many times
> just have to do things my way, and why the direction of LCad's current
> development threatens to preclude the very continuation of my work.
I have absolutely had this same perception, though I've never had a problem with
your English! Being "The Clone Guy," I sense that my contributions are taken
with a grain of salt (if at all), and my continued use of the LEdit makes me
feel as though I'm considered somewhat obsolete.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: L3P Warnings
|
| (...) Ah Ha! I knew it! When I suggested you were probably "still running the original LEDIT program on some ancient 386 ... stashed in an attic somewhere", you only denied the 386 part. You *are* still running LEDIT in somebody's attic! So I know (...) (14 years ago, 8-Jul-10, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: L3P Warnings
|
| (...) I agree to some extent. But now it's there, like it or not. I have very little (if any?) use of it and yes it annoys me a little. The deleting of extra blank lines (used to group lines some way related to eachother) that makes the dat code a (...) (14 years ago, 7-Jul-10, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
46 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
|
|
|
|
