Hi Michael,

>Maybe it is better to make 360 degrees always use the
>same spacing regardless of the spacing like you were expecting.
>What do you think?


I was doing another test of array with touching objects like this and was thinking it out..

Currently, when I want to cover the 360 degrees with a steps (height=8, segment=60°) I type "6;300;8;0". If however I want the subsequent piece at 360°, I can type "7;360;8;0".
If you altered the current array behaviour with vertical and radial step options according to my expectation, I would type "6;360;8;0" for covering 360 degrees. But what extra piece at 360°? Would I have to type "7;420;8;0"? It would be even more confusing...

Besides, I thought about adding the "Step angle: Iterate angle" field to array-circular command. I mean you could type Item count along with Step angle while Angle to fill would be ignored. It would be clear, then - 6 times 60 is 360.

Petr