Want to Fix Command For *.Fas

[johnpieter]

I have one *.fas.I want fix the command with *lsp for that *.fas.So how to fix that command??

 

 

Here in my *.fas Command is "checking"

 

Through Lsp i want change that Command.Just i am giving "Chk" means it should be read that *.fas

 

(defun main

(princ)

)

(main)

(defun c:Chk

(Checking)

)

[ketxu]

Maybe vla-sendcommand could help you. It likes send keys method ^^

[BlackBox]

Please forgive me, as I am having a hard time understanding your request.

 

Are you asking how to decompile a .FAS so that you can modify the contained .LSP file(s)?

[johnpieter]

RenderMan....

 

Actually i have one *.fas for Duplicate delete.For that command is 'dupdelete'.So this command is so lengthy.So i know we cannt open that *.fas.So i want shorten that command from my lsp.Suppose if i am giving 'Test' command means its should activate that 'dupdelete' command....

 

Like

(defun main

(princ)

)

(main)

(defun c:Test

(dupdelete)

)

[BlackBox]

???

 

(defun c:DD () (c:DupDelete))
(defun c:DupDelete ()
 ;; <-- Your code here
 )

[johnpieter]

???

 

(defun c:DD () (c:DupDelete))
(defun c:DupDelete ()
 ;; <-- Your code here
 )

 

here your code means which code?render???*.fas Code?

[BlackBox]

here your code means which code?render???*.fas Code?

 

Look, if you load your .FAS and it provides a command called DupDelete, then paste this at the command line:

 

(defun c:DD () (c:DupDelete))

 

... and hit Enter.

 

Now test by typing DD at the command line, and hit Enter. Does it do the same as entering DupDelete+Enter?

[alanjt]

Look, if you load your .FAS and it provides a command called DupDelete, then paste this at the command line:

 

(defun c:DD () (c:DupDelete))

 

... and hit Enter.

 

Now test by typing DD at the command line, and hit Enter. Does it do the same as entering DupDelete+Enter?

Just tweak your acad.pgp file.

[BlackBox]

Just tweak your acad.pgp file.

 

That is another option.

 

I stuck with the LISP topic, because it sounded like they wanted to revise the source code for the .FAS, etc.

 

Very unclear.