Open / closed polysurf
 1-10  11-27

Previous
Next
 From:  Brian (BWTR)
1447.11 In reply to 1447.10 
The joj of MoI is not even a sign of a crash!

And I am no complaining. Though, still, V1 is here and it would seem that maybe a few current working methods--not perhaps new things especially--would be a great boon to users if improved in the short term rather than waiting for V2. My own problem especially is not being able to readily identify were points have not been cleanly connected--a regular problem in mine and seveeral others posts.That these areas could be highlighted visually and or self connect better maybe?

Just a thought.
Brian
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  manz
1447.12 In reply to 1447.5 
Hi Micheal,

Sorry, but I am a little confused with your reply on my initial question.

Post #2 >>>There isn't a way to do it right now, but it will be an easy thing to add for V2.
For MoI v1 you need to copy/paste into Rhino for this checking.

Post #5>>>It is not difficult to add the script interface that will enable this,

(I will say that it is the first 3d application I have used that does not give direct feedback of position/ orientation etc of an object.)

-------------------------------


I would also now need to ask, what do you consider a bug? Would this in fact be a need for moi to crash?

I ask due to your comment
post #7>>>So far nothing has been reported that is significant enough to merit a service release.
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  jbshorty
1447.13 In reply to 1447.11 
Hi Brian. That's the beauty of a public beta system. You will start to see those additional tools in the upcoming betas. You can think of it almost the same way you would think of a SR. And because it is a beta, it can be released without extensive testing and without written doumentation. The updates come much faster. Do you remember how long it took Michael to finish writing the ducumentation for V1?

jonah
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  tyglik
1447.14 In reply to 1447.12 
you can set up at least a shortcut for selecting closed (poly)surfaces...

code:
script:moi.geometryDatabase.getObjects().getSolids().setProperty( 'selected', true );
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
1447.15 In reply to 1447.14 
Oops! Thanks Petr, that is correct, there is a way to do this after all I had just forgotten that method myself!

To use the script Petr provided above, go to Options / Shortcut keys, and add in a new entry.

Then add whatever key you would like, and paste in the script above as the command.

Then when you hit that key, any closed solid will be selected, that is a method you can use currently to determine if an object is a solid or not.

Sorry I forgot about that method!

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
1447.16 In reply to 1447.11 
Hi Brian,

> That these areas could be highlighted visually and or self connect better maybe?

That would be a new feature - definitely something that would be worth exploring when it is time to add new features during the next beta.

A service release would not be focused on adding new features, but instead on correcting bugs.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
1447.17 In reply to 1447.12 
Hi Steve,

you wrote:
> Sorry, but I am a little confused with your reply on my initial question.

I wrote:
>>There isn't a way to do it right now, but it will be an easy thing to add for V2.
For MoI v1 you need to copy/paste into Rhino for this checking.

>>It is not difficult to add the script interface that will enable this,


I'm not quite sure which part is confusing you? Here I am trying to say that it will be an easy thing to incorporate into the next release, which is currently planned to be the v2 beta release.

But it actually turns out that the script interface is already in place in v1 for identifying closed objects, I was just looking for an "isClosed" method that is not present for surfaces, but there is another way that can be used instead as posted above.

Sorry for getting confused myself on this part!


> (I will say that it is the first 3d application I have used that
> does not give direct feedback of position/ orientation etc of an object.)

But I thought you mentioned previously that you had used Rhino since the first Rhino betas? It's no different over there.

In general CAD programs are not so focused on a kind of generic bounding box / pivot point type approach. Actually usually that type of method is used by applications that are not so focused on precision.

In a CAD program you tend to align an object using some kind of command (like in MoI it would be Rotate) that allows you to snap on to specific individual features of the object and use those to perform the orientation, rather than just some generic spot that is in some arbitrary averaged centroid of the object.

Once you have placed an object in its desired orientation, I guess I don't understand why you want a special readout of it after that, what purpose would that serve for you?

I do expect to add more orientation type functions in v2...


> I would also now need to ask, what do you consider a bug?
> Would this in fact be a need for moi to crash?

It's just the typical definition - something that is malfunctioning.

Missing features that are intended to be added in future versions are not bugs.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
1447.18 In reply to 1447.11 
Hi Brian,

> would be a great boon to users if improved in the short
> term rather than waiting for V2.

Don't get me wrong, I certainly agree that it would be useful to users to have new stuff added.

Unfortunately putting out new releases of a finalized version creates a lot of additional work for me, that's what I was trying to explain earlier.

Some logistical things I have to plan around what is efficient and feasible for my own work schedule.

Ultimately being efficient in my work schedule ends up being beneficial in the long run because it means that I can get more new features accomplished overall.

If I had more than 24 hours in a single day, it would be a lot easier for me to do all kinds of extra work all of which would be beneficial to users... But I'm stuck with only 24 hours in a day so there are limits on the amount of work that I am able to produce.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  manz
1447.19 In reply to 1447.17 
Hi Michael,

>>>But I thought you mentioned previously that you had used Rhino since the first Rhino betas? It's no different over there.

From Rhino release 1. That provided a "what" command, it also had a set of analyze tools, such as length / radius / volume etc, even an option to show broken edges.
So I am not sure as to why you would say "its no different"


I will have a look at the options within the scripts.

Steve
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
1447.20 In reply to 1447.19 
Hi Steve, the "What" command for Rhino v1 did not give size or orientation information on solids.

There was no concept of an orientation attached to an object in Rhino v1.

I do expect to add in a set of Analyze commands to MoI to query things like volume, length, etc... These are not present in version 1.0 though.

If you have Rhino I guess I don't quite understand what the fundamental problem is for you, are you having problems transferring data into Rhino to perform these types of queries?

I can understand that it would be good to have these operations inside of MoI, that's why they are going to be added.

Version 1.0 of MoI is focused mostly on making it quick and easy to draw simple objects, that core mission does not require these types of analysis tools, so that's why they have not been a focus so far.

In general development of MoI is a lot different than development of Rhino. I'm not rushing to throw in every single kind of possible tool I can think of which is what I did with Rhino.

Instead with MoI the approach is a lot more careful and calculated, I'm trying to slowly build things up so that the final result can have a carefully balanced interface.

I can understand that you might have some frustration with this approach if you are more used to the "tons of stuff" kind of approach instead.

Over time I expect for this approach to pay off with plenty of functionality but with with an overall easier and more pleasant to use interface.

This approach may mean that the current version of MoI is not suitable for you and you may have to wait for a while before things kind of bubble up to the level of functionality that you need.

However, having said that there are also a lot of things in MoI currently that you may be interested in as well, so a good approach for you currently might be to use MoI in combination with Rhino instead of expecting to use MoI completely on its own.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
1447.21 In reply to 1447.20 
Hi Steve, I guess the disconnect is that MoI is not really intended to be like a completely direct replacement for Rhino, it is focused on somewhat different things than Rhino.

There is certainly overlap, and that overlap will grow larger over time, but it just was not a primary goal of MoI to do all the exact same things as Rhino.

I guess that's why it does not seem strange to me to recommend using MoI and Rhino in combination with one another, if Rhino does things that you need that MoI currently does not do.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  manz
1447.22 In reply to 1447.20 
Hi Michael,

>>>the "What" command for Rhino v1 did not give size or orientation information on solids.

I know, it would give me the info if the object was closed or not. The script posted to select solids now gives me this info, So not a problem.

>>>If you have Rhino I guess I don't quite understand what the fundamental problem is for you, are you having problems transferring data into Rhino to perform these types of queries?

I personally purchased version1 (on its release) for work, after that, all other versions where purchased by the company, so I do not use them at home.

>>>I can understand that you might have some frustration with this approach if you are more used to the "tons of stuff" kind of approach instead.

It is not a case of "tons of stuff", I was just looking for a simple way to give me ref of an objects position etc. Probably more due to habit rather than a real need.


Steve
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
1447.23 In reply to 1447.22 
Hi Steve,

> I personally purchased version1 (on its release) for work, after
> that, all other versions where purchased by the company, so
> I do not use them at home.

I see.... unfortunately the 3DM file toolkit only supports reading Rhino v1 files and not writing out to them.

So it only works to copy from Rhino v1 and then paste into MoI, you can't do copy/paste in the other direction like you can with Rhino v2, v3, or v4.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  manz
1447.24 In reply to 1447.23 
Hi Michael,

>>>I see.... unfortunately the 3DM file toolkit only supports reading Rhino v1 files and not writing out to them.

It does not matter, I dont really want to use Rhino at home. I will use MoI. I also have other programs for meshes etc.

Anyway, I have now made purchase of MoI

Steve
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
1447.25 In reply to 1447.24 
Thanks very much for your order Steve!

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Brian (BWTR)
1447.26 In reply to 1447.25 
Just to clarify a thought maybe.
To me, an SR, a point version like 1.1., or a say. 1.1betaA are all the same thing.

Brian
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
 From:  tyglik
1447.27 In reply to 1447.22 
Hi Steve,

>>all other versions where purchased by the company,
>>so I do not use them at home.

But you might use it. Just reread a license conditions.

Petr
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged
 

Reply to All Reply to All

 

 
 
Show messages:  1-10  11-27