Petr wrote:
> 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...

Yeah, with the current way it is easier to add one item to get the spacing you wanted. I think you're correct that having to extend the angle in order to get another copy at 360 degrees is worse.

So that means that I will leave it the current way for this - only 360 degrees with no stepping will have the special case spacing.


> 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.

I kind of try to avoid this type of thing where there are similar fields, where one is ignored if another is filled... I was just thinking that maybe I could put in a toggle switch on the "Angle to fill:" label, so that when you clicked it you could flip it to "Step angle:" instead. I'm talking about the same type of toggle (with a little cycle arrow) that the Circle/Center command has when you are picking the radius - you can click on Radius there to switch it to picking the diameter instead.

- Michael

Schbeurd wrote:
> So I hope that if there are changes in the current implementation, this
> kind of behaviour will remain at least as an option...

If I understood him correctly, I think that Petr's later analysis was a vote for keeping it the way it currently is.

> BTW, I would prefer a default "angle to fill" of 360° instead of 3600.... ;-)

:) This was another bug that is fixed for the next beta. It was a problem with converting some text of "360.0" into 3600 if your locale has certain characteristics. You Europeans with your commas and decimal points all reversed are always causing problems!! :) :) :)

- Michael

>> :) This was another bug that is fixed for the next beta. It was a problem with converting some text of "360.0" into 3600 if your locale has certain characteristics. You Europeans with your commas and decimal points all reversed are always causing problems!! :) :) :)


We do our best to keep you busy ! ;-))
Thanks for fixing it !

Hi Michael,

>I kind of try to avoid this type of thing where
>there are similar fields, where one is ignored
>if another is filled...

However in the Array-Curve command prompt there are two fields - Item count and Distance - and an applicable is underlined.
So you can choose either that kind of behaviour or this how you mentioned. Anyway I think it would be useful feature.

>If I understood him correctly, I think that Petr's later
>analysis was a vote for keeping it the way it currently is.

Definitely!

>You Europeans with your commas and decimal points all reversed
>are always causing problems!! :) :) :)

hehe....

Petr

> However in the Array-Curve command prompt there are two fields - Item
> count and Distance - and an applicable is underlined.

I thought you might mention that! :)

The problem is not quite as bad in that case since there are only two fields for the entire command. When there are more fields, this type of implicit toggle becomes more awkward.

It shouldn't be hard to do the toggle switch, I will give that a try.

- Michael

I've got the toggle switch working now for the next beta, so that will let you switch between "Angle to Fill" / "Angle step" methods for the angle field.

There is still quite a bit of other stuff to do before the next beta is ready though.

- Michael

On other quick note on your helix example - another way to extract an edge is to select it and do a control+drag on it which will drag off a copy of it.