LDraw.org Discussion Forums
LDInspector - Printable Version

+- LDraw.org Discussion Forums (https://forums.ldraw.org)
+-- Forum: LDraw Programs (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-7.html)
+--- Forum: LDraw Editors and Viewers (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-11.html)
+--- Thread: LDInspector (/thread-23882.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14


RE: LDInspector - N. W. Perry - 2020-02-26

(2020-02-25, 21:37)Stefan Frenz Wrote: Thanks for testing and reporting. Hum, the "jdk-13.0.2.jdk/Contents/Home/bin/java" seems strange to me, it should read "jdk-13.0.2/bin/java". But the exception seems to be an independent issue, did you use the "last" version of LDInspector? Hum, this thread is messed Blush  up - I think it's in post #30... Big Grin

The JDK was placed there by the package installer from AdoptOpenJDK, so I left it there and just changed the pathname to match it (after several "no such directory" messages).

I'm pretty sure I used the LDInspector version from post #24 instead, so I will try the one from post #30. EDIT: Hey, that worked! Now to mess around with it a bit.  Smile


RE: LDInspector - Stefan Frenz - 2020-02-26

(2020-02-26, 21:07)N. W. Perry Wrote: The JDK was placed there by the package installer from AdoptOpenJDK, so I left it there and just changed the pathname to match it (after several "no such directory" messages).

I'm pretty sure I used the LDInspector version from post #24 instead, so I will try the one from post #30. EDIT: Hey, that worked! Now to mess around with it a bit.  Smile
Thanks for reporting - I checked the version in #24, and ooops. Blush  I'm sorry, that one was too buggy. Sad
I'm happy to read that it works with the one from #30, please let me know what you like, dislike, wish. Smile


RE: LDInspector - N. W. Perry - 2020-02-27

(2020-02-26, 21:19)Stefan Frenz Wrote: Thanks for reporting - I checked the version in #24, and ooops. Blush  I'm sorry, that one was too buggy. Sad
I'm happy to read that it works with the one from #30, please let me know what you like, dislike, wish. Smile

Well, it's pretty slick, I can say. The UI is clean and everything works well—and at the same time, I get the idea there's a lot more I could be doing if I poked around some more. (Maybe some tooltips to explain the different functions would be helpful?)

So far, I've re-checked my OMR folder for compliance, after already checking it in MPDCenter, and while I didn't discover any new compliance issues, I did find a file error that I had missed—an embedded but unreferenced subfile that I'd fixed in my personal copy of the model but not in my OMR-ized version.

Incidentally, it also flagged my rigid (flex system) hoses as being non-rubber colored. That's intentional, since I feel like these parts are closer to the hard ABS plastic than to the softer, rubber-like "classic" hoses, but I admit that's a total guess since I don't own any of these parts in real life.  Tongue

Anyway, I look forward to unlocking more of the secrets of this tool. I have a feeling it's going to crop up often in the future, as I come across various tasks that I need to do, especially to a bunch of files at once.


RE: LDInspector - Stefan Frenz - 2020-02-27

(2020-02-27, 1:01)N. W. Perry Wrote: Incidentally, it also flagged my rigid (flex system) hoses as being non-rubber colored. That's intentional, since I feel like these parts are closer to the hard ABS plastic than to the softer, rubber-like "classic" hoses, but I admit that's a total guess since I don't own any of these parts in real life.  Tongue

Anyway, I look forward to unlocking more of the secrets of this tool. I have a feeling it's going to crop up often in the future, as I come across various tasks that I need to do, especially to a bunch of files at once.
Thanks a lot!  Smile

The rubber-color-checks are (hopefully!) marked as "hint" and have something "perhaps" in the message - that is just because I missed to change my wheel-rubber-color repeatedly. Me too having some parts with non-rubber-color by intention, so I just ignore my own hint. Wink  Ignoring my hint seems easier to me than not-forgetting to change the color. Big Grin

If you need to check OMR-compliance with a bunch of files at once: if you start LDInspector with filenames as parameters, there will be no GUI but the OMR-checks will be done for each given file with output to console. I use this in my (local) git repository before I commit "almost done" models. If you use my starter-script, just add "$@" at the end:
Code:
java -.... ldinsp.LDInspector "$@"

If there are other tasks that may fit your batch processing needs (e.g. export to OBJ format), please let me know - should be done easily.


RE: LDInspector - Philippe Hurbain - 2020-02-27

(2020-02-27, 1:01)N. W. Perry Wrote: I did find a file error that I had missed—an embedded but unreferenced subfile that I'd fixed in my personal copy of the model but not in my OMR-ized version.
Speaking of embedded but not referenced files, when I tried to check my 42105 catamaran model, LDinspector issued a warning for the TEXMAP-able subfiles of the sails (66645as01/66645bs01)


RE: LDInspector - Stefan Frenz - 2020-02-27

(2020-02-27, 8:47)Philippe Hurbain Wrote: Speaking of embedded but not referenced files, when I tried to check my 42105 catamaran model, LDinspector issued a warning for the TEXMAP-able subfiles of the sails (66645as01/66645bs01)
Thanks for reporting. Smile

The mentioned parts are referenced in a meta/comment line like
Code:
0 !: 1 16 -0.25 0 0 -1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 42105 - s\42105 - 66645as01.dat
Those are not evaluated by LDInspector so far (at the moment, I track only part-ref lines and the LDCad-specials like paths). I will try to find the TEXMAP-spec and try to include appropriate handling. Maybe next version. Wink


RE: LDInspector - Philippe Hurbain - 2020-02-27

(2020-02-27, 9:51)Stefan Frenz Wrote: The mentioned parts are referenced in a meta/comment line like
Those are not evaluated by LDInspector so far
I guessed that Wink


RE: LDInspector - Stefan Frenz - 2020-02-27

As far as I understood the spec for the TEXMAP extension, the check would only require checking for lines starting with "0 !: 1 ... FILENAME" and handle them as "1 ... FILENAME". I've implemented this, now the checks result in "file ok" for the catamaran (thanks for pointing to that example!). Smile

The alternative would have been to search all comment/meta lines and therein count sub-part-filenames as "used". This would be extension-safe for all other extensions using file references, but it would (a) slow down the check and (b) also accidentally count files as used even if they are only used in real comments (for example after changing a reference and keeping the old one for history/user-information purpose as in this example). I've implemented this and removed it quickly as (b) came into mind... Wink 

So my question is: are there any other known extensions using file references, LDInspector should take care of?
The LDCad-specials should be taken care of already (thanks again for your help Roland!).


RE: LDInspector - Orion Pobursky - 2020-02-27

(2020-02-27, 13:11)Stefan Frenz Wrote: So my question is: are there any other known extensions using file references, LDInspector should take care of?
The LDCad-specials should be taken care of already (thanks again for your help Roland!).

No official META commands. Unofficial ones are not disallowed by the OMR but the correctness is on the author


RE: LDInspector - Stefan Frenz - 2020-02-27

Thanks! Smile