- Marcar como nuevo
- Favorito
- Suscribir
- Silenciar
- Suscribirse a un feed RSS
- Resaltar
- Imprimir
- Denunciar
Hi,
then the matter is clear.
So, someone made two essential mistakes on your side (in 2010)
1. The unforgivable mistake of changing a standard definition - you shouldn't do that with any standard definition.
2. The second mistake was that the definition wasn't really changed, but a second definition was added with the same name as a standard pattern.
(Order: first the original, second the fake definition with the same name)
- - -
Question 1: Do you want to keep both errors in the future, or just the first, or just the second, or better yet neither of them?
Suggestion: Do it the way I personally think it should be done and it makes technical sense.
_
In that case, you would be able to hatch as before, but the name would not be ANSI32, but perhaps ANSI32_rat53
Existing plans / existing old hatching could be easily updated to the new version - a small tool and one click are enough.
What does it look like. Should I help you?
Sebastian