Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!lll-lcc!well!ewhac From: ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: IFF form for 2D drawings (again) Message-ID: <6796@well.UUCP> Date: 11 Aug 88 06:40:49 GMT References: <11640003@hpfcdc.HP.COM> <6778@well.UUCP> <63566@sun.uucp> Reply-To: ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link Lines: 29 In article <63566@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes: >Leo, let us be serious here. RULE #1 for ILBM is : > If you don't understand the FORM then don't look inside it. > >The simple reason being, that like any modular programming language the >scope of a chunk is limited to the FORM it is contained in. [ ... ] Woah! I thought I had said: >In article <6778@well.UUCP> ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) writes: >> Although this flavor of CMAP chunk will only appear in a DR2D FORM, >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>we already have a well-known and -advertised (and -coded-for) CMAP chunk >>for ILBM FORMs. I'm well aware of the scope rules for IFF. It's perfectly all right to define a hunk type with the same name as something else, but different contents, so long as it appears in the correct context (namely, a DR2D FORM). However, since his CMAP hunk is functionally identical to an ILBM CMAP, it just seemed wasteful (and possibly confusing to new IFF programmers) to define a whole new one, and write new code for it. But of course, he's perfectly free to do whatever he feels is right. _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape INET: well!ewhac@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU \_ -_ Recumbent Bikes: UUCP: pacbell > !{well,unicom}!ewhac O----^o The Only Way To Fly. hplabs / (pronounced "AE-wack") "Work FOR? I don't work FOR anybody! I'm just having fun." -- The Doctor