Design Idea: Sketcher 'Point' and TechDraw

[Roy_043]

Alas, I have the serious issue that I cannot include a Point at all (file Attached, View is a rectangle plus point, View001 is only a point).

I have that issue as well.

Code: Select all

OS: Windows 8.1 Version 6.3 (Build 9600)
Word size of FreeCAD: 64-bit
Version: 0.21.0.31432 (Git)
Build type: Release
Branch: master
Hash: 63a2855751d638bf27ed969dc60654bda2b54baf
Python 3.10.8, Qt 5.15.4, Coin 4.0.0, Vtk 9.1.0, OCC 7.6.3
Locale: Dutch/Netherlands (nl_NL)
Installed mods: 

[onekk]

Probably some helpers Points in TechDraw, should be a good thing, maybe:

- Arc and Circle Centers
- Shape "Centers" if there is some way to calculate them

Usually when trying to construct things using Scripts, some informations are accessible without too much problems, as every arc has the center of the circle from which the arc is derived from.

Probably when "Drafting" something in TechDraw importing "constructions lines" as a whole will involve deleting too many things.

Regards

Carlo D.

[rich61]

Its your job to tear it down, its my job to defend. I'll be happy to either win or loose. If I fail to defend, then it was a bad idea.

I didn't read the link before, but I and lots of people have been using those types of workarounds for a long time. They are a bit tedious but they seem to always work for me. Before we had 'Split-Edge' on the tool bar, I could split an edge in a couple of manual steps. But I like the Split-Edge tool, its faster and does what its name says it does.

I'm not claiming any new ideas. This doesn't create an ability to do anything that we couldn't do before, just makes it easier and hopefully conceptually clean.

The point of my post is to put it on the toolbar. There are several steps, and they are easily automated, fast and correctly every time. It would give every appearance and function of a new more versatile Point. And there are several different workarounds, so an additional point of the post is to choose the best one and make sure it works in all cases that matter, and also that it doesn't cause problems. Some function support such as moving the Point, and deleting the Point are necessary. Everything tied together, to make a useful function. Some analysis.

TNP is a problem, but I already have to avoid that or fix up my drawings now, and whether I use the manual steps for the workaround or whether it is automated makes little difference with respect to TNP. This idea will not solve TNP nor make it worse.

Thanks for pointing that out, it is a consideration. I'm scoring one negative.

[rich61]

To onekk, I agree, having construction lines easily accessible in TechDraw would be nice. Maybe that is possible also. Its something to think about.

Just getting a point from Sketcher to TechDraw is a good first goal.

[onekk]

...

Problem are not here to defend or deny a post, as probably @domad answer is what trigger your answers (please link the message you are replying so it is more easy to spot the matter and the meaning of an answer)

As from other forum, I think that domad is not denying the importance of such things, but he consider the "process" of integrating changes in FreeCAD or in TechDraw in this case.

Probably the point is that if a similar discussion have already been done, and some "good reasons" to not proceed with modifications have been raised from developers, is better to see "what is the problems" and "where are the difficult steps", and what developers have answered, before to make further considerations.

EDIT:

I've read other topics, and probably wanderefan has already answered that the modification is not a simple thing:

https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic. ... 45#p650045

https://forum.freecad.org/viewtopic.php ... d7#p649879

And IMHO they are not a deny of the problem it is simply that "now" is not the "best time" to do this sort of things, as there is already many things to be done by developers.

Sadly this could not be the answer you expect, but if you have some time and skills to submit code you could even try to "help development"

END EDIT.

Following part is about my personal opinion about "TNP mitigation".

FreeCAD sources "now" are in the process of integrating a "TNP mitigation" solution, and this involve modifying lot of code and testing many things.

So probably trying to make "too much things" and coding maybe some difficult to obtain things when there is an underlying "big code modification" will not be a "clever use of coding time".

FreeCAD development is not "stopped" or "slowed down", or even "stalled" as some critics seems to suggest, from time to time, but is simply "done behind the scenes", and probably is very active, as this "big change" is not so easy as some people seems to think. It is true that there is RealThunder LS3 version that has it integrated from some time now, but it true also that RT version is not "in sync" with actual FreeCAD sources, (even RT admit that he sync source from time to time as it is difficult to maintain in sync two "diverging" code base).

A little thing that seems to be not guessed by some critics is that RT is "one man" and not a "team of developers" so we all have to thank RT for having not simply "made his own version" and developing "his version" only, but instead working hard to integrate some of "his solutions" in the FreeCAD codebase, this thing is not too common even in OpenSource ecosystem, as usually the "forks" tend to diverge and not to "converge", and this lead not unusually to "different type of software".

Kind Regards

Carlo D.

[domad]

Greetings to the Community!
Thanks @onekk for the precise and punctual clarifications on complex technical things, as always, making them simple even for those who are not familiar with coding.

[wandererfan]

Alas, I have the serious issue that I cannot include a Point at all (file Attached, View is a rectangle plus point, View001 is only a point).

Does setting "Show loose 2d geometry" help?

PrefAdvancedTab.png (81.37 KiB) Viewed 819 times

[chrisb]

...no problem for me

Opening your file I still cannot see any point. Is there a setting, e.g. for the color of such points?

[rich61]

I love Doman's comments. I love your comments. And yes, I should code this up.

But many years ago I was part of a software design team ( so long ago I'm almost obsolete) and we would present our designs in front of each other . They were so mean, if I had a dumb idea, they made me buy the beer. So, don't be gentle. I am too old to be triggered.

Designing before you code is always a good idea. Exposing your idea to other designers is a good idea, we all get tunnel vision, when by ourselves. Being able to gracefully accept criticism of an idea is a good thing.

I think RT is 100% working on the Topo integration now, there are changes in it every day, and almost no updates to the Link version. But I am not sure his topo changes will affect Part Design, might be Assembly3 focused. So moving forward despite Topo problems is best.

So, all technical remarks are valued. Policy, timing, and political considerations are above my pay grade.

Thank you for your feedback, Carlo.

[onekk]

...

If you are able to code in C++ and willing to collaborate, FreeCAD is always open to contributions, so probably the most clever move is to ask who is in charge of Techdraw development and try to coordinate efforts.

Indigenous are not hostile, here, but there are many people who came here and start to criticize developers with no end goal in mind.

So some extent of oversensitivity (probably a bad english noun) is to take in account.

Kind Regards.

Carlo D.