LDraw.org Discussion Forums
Search path discussion - Printable Version

+- LDraw.org Discussion Forums (https://forums.ldraw.org)
+-- Forum: General (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-12.html)
+--- Forum: Official File Specifications/Standards (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-32.html)
+--- Thread: Search path discussion (/thread-24495.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4


RE: Search path discussion - Travis Cobbs - 2021-03-30

(2021-03-29, 22:04)Roland Melkert Wrote: So just add 'Models' to the current p and parts folders?

Yes. Specifically, this would be the official search path:

<Directory containing top-level file opened by user>
<LDraw>\p
<LDraw>\parts
<LDraw>\models

Then, note that some programs look for files in <LDraw>\Unofficial\p and <LDraw>\Unofficial\parts if they can't find them in the official locations.


RE: Search path discussion - Roland Melkert - 2021-04-13

(2021-03-30, 1:06)Travis Cobbs Wrote: Then, note that some programs look for files in <LDraw>\Unofficial\p and <LDraw>\Unofficial\parts if they can't find them in the official locations.

Sorry for the late reply, I've been very busy with work lately.

I still would like to put some time in analyzing the 'top level only' thing as used in current tools.

Because I really don't like what it suggests (library parts can look different when used in different models).

It will make multi file/model editing very hard to maintain.

It will also mess with your part inventory overviews, as the images of parts can differ per model while reality has only one version.

In short could we postpone voting on this, unless we limit it to just the folder locations and leave scoping/context out of it for the time being.


RE: Search path discussion - Magnus Forsberg - 2021-04-14

I remember an experiment I did way back when I started editing parts.

A default set-up of libraries have two folders, Parts and Unofficial/Parts.
A full dowload of all unofficial files will create a set of duplicated parts. A recycled partnumber will end up both in Parts and Unofficial Parts. 2 versions of the same partnumber.

To understand which file I was seeing in MLCad I edited the version in Unofficial. I gave it a different description and I coloured sections of it red. 
When I opened MLCad and generated a new part.lst and updated the library, I saw the old description from the official file in the Parts-folder, but the red geometry from the file in the Unofficial/Parts-folder. (... or vice versa. I can't remember now.)

It's a long time since I used MLCad, and a new version is released now, but I think this illustrate very well what could/will happen.

I have since then been removing old files from the official Parts-folder, and placed the updated version in Unofficial/Parts-folder.
Every official part release ends with me sitting at my desk and sorting all the files so that I don't have any duplicated partnumbers present.
I want to know that the geometry I see, in any editor, is the updated version.


RE: Search path discussion - Travis Cobbs - 2021-04-14

I didn't think that MLCad supported Unofficial parts directly. It may be that the AIOI configures it to support them, or that you did that.


RE: Search path discussion - Orion Pobursky - 2021-04-14

(2021-04-14, 18:09)Travis Cobbs Wrote: I didn't think that MLCad supported Unofficial parts directly. It may be that the AIOI configures it to support them, or that you did that.

It does. I modeled the search path dialog in LDDP after MLCad's


RE: Search path discussion - Willy Tschager - 2021-04-15

(2021-04-14, 18:09)Travis Cobbs Wrote: I didn't think that MLCad supported Unofficial parts directly. It may be that the AIOI configures it to support them, or that you did that.

You're not reading my tutorials? Shame on you Big Grin

http://www.holly-wood.it/mlcad/unofficial1-en.html

w.


RE: Search path discussion - Philippe Hurbain - 2021-04-15

(2021-04-15, 6:31)Willy Tschager Wrote: You're not reading my tutorials? Shame on you Big Grin

http://www.holly-wood.it/mlcad/unofficial1-en.html

w.

No, it's just that nobody uses it now  Big Grin Big Grin Big Grin


RE: Search path discussion - Travis Cobbs - 2021-04-15

(2021-04-14, 21:04)Orion Pobursky Wrote: It does. I modeled the search path dialog in LDDP after MLCad's

Based on the tutorial in Willy's response below, it sounds like MLCad supports having the user add the Unofficial\p and Unofficial\parts directories to the search path, but does not have these by default. What am I missing?


RE: Search path discussion - Orion Pobursky - 2021-04-15

(2021-04-15, 20:14)Travis Cobbs Wrote: Based on the tutorial in Willy's response below, it sounds like MLCad supports having the user add the Unofficial\p and Unofficial\parts directories to the search path, but does not have these by default. What am I missing?

You're not missing anything. This is the same thing all the programs do since there's no defined path. That said, I stand by my opinion that we should not officially define an unofficial part path. It should always be explicitly user set.


RE: Search path discussion - Willy Tschager - 2021-04-30

(2021-03-16, 13:26)Orion Pobursky Wrote: Since non-LSB members can't comment on the LSB forum, this thread is for discussion of the search path proposal there.

To kick this off I'd like to comment on something Roland posted:

This is precisely the point of embedding such a file in the MPD and why we do it for the OMR. Local files should always override library parts. Otherwise the OMR breaks and parts authoring become morse inconvenient since you'd have to overwrite the official file if you're using or creating a fix.

Could we please bring this to a happy end?

w.