Subject:
|
Re: MLCad wishlist (was Re: Ice Cream
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.mlcad
|
Date:
|
Mon, 29 Nov 1999 20:37:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1437 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.mlcad, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Mike Poindexter wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > #3 would be to specify other oblique views so I can look at the model
> > > from other angles.
> >
> > Probably allow something like that in the program default settings that would
> > allow you to change the angle of vie for each window.
Right now (MLCAD 1.5), you can right-click a view, and change *that window* to
one of the standard views. But you can't add new view-definitions, like "upside
down" or "right-front-below" (aka, pit-crew view angle). LDAO allows these
types of definitions, and saves them to ldraw.ini file, in the Windows
directory, under the section [Views]. LDLite also recognizes these settings.
If ML-CAD had a function to define new views, that would be cool. If it stored
them the same way LDAO does, so the definitions could be shared between
programs, that would be doubly-cool.
> > As a side wish, I would like to be able to close certain views, which would
> > speed up the rendering and also allow you to have a long (left to right)
> > window and two more squarish ones. Or a tall one on the side with the other
> > side having two squarish ones.
>
> Ya, that would be nice. Right now you can have 4, 2 or 1 window but not
> 3. Sometimes 3 is just right. Let me detach them and put them where I
> wish instead of just using windowpane dividers. Heck, let me have
> arbitrary windows with arbitrary views, I will pay the speed penalty if
> I really need all those views...
Or how about prioritizing views, so the 'current' view-window is rerendered and
redrawn first, with the other views following? Assuming that doesn't happen
now. And assuming it fits with the MLCAD approach to rendering.
By 'arbitrary windows', do you (Larry) mean disconnected, a separate window for
each view? That would be cool. Useful and easier for users to grasp (don't
want a particular view? Just close the window.)
What would be ideal (for me, at least) would be dockable view windows. This
would allow people to group or separate their MLCAD windows at will. But I
don't see this level of feature as being high-priority.
> > > #4 would be to allow copying parts and groups of parts across submodels.
> > > It is very hard to copy, say, a coupler assembly (getting the magnet
> > > seated in the holder correctly takes fiddling) from one submodel to
> > > another. I had to do it from notepad.
> >
> > I think the trick to this is to make another submodel (couplerassembly.dat?)
> > and using that to go into other submodels, which then basically nests several
> > deep in submodel functions.
>
> Right. but for doing instructions and inventories, I want to be able to
> "unsubmodel" stuff, and I haven't yet figured out how to do it. Inlining
> (which LDAO can do for you) isn't quite what I want. I want macro
> expansion, so to speak, rather than just inlining... Basically take a
> model with submodels and turn the whole thing into one big file. No
> submodels, repeated parts, etc... the whole 9 yards.
I'm not seeing the difference between inlining and macro expansion...
Also, how can you simultaneously avoid submodels *and* repeated parts? The
solution to having submodels is to repeat parts, and the solution to avoid
repeated parts is to use submodels? So I must be missing something...
> > > #10 would be to let Modify Part do something different. When I select a
> > > part I want to be able to bring up its properties and fiddle the
> > > position, rotation, color. Modify Part seems to bring up a list of parts
> > > that I dunno what to do with.
> >
> > Modify part should be named something like "Change part" or have the
> > additional options like Larry says.
>
> Wait, I can change which part I use here?
Yes. MLCAD gives a big list of all the parts, you can scroll through and pick
one. It's a bit of a pain.
Having a complete dialog-based edit would be good. Or just a "let me overtype
the text-command for this part" would be good.
> I just got done editing all my
> dat files by hand to fix up the obsoleted parts. Is THAT what "modify
> part" does? Actually, how about some sort of automatic recognitiion of
> the movedtos? Let me review a model and all submodels and for each
> obsolete one, ask me if I want to change to the replacement part. If the
> bounding rectangle is different, let me drop out, fix the
> position/rotation, and resume the search...
LDAO can update (most) obsolete parts. Look for the Mover tool, which is
mis-labeled in the current version, it shows up on the Tools menu as a second
Sort function. :(
But LDAO doesn't compare old and new part-files. Actually, the old part-file
isn't around to check anymore, so doing bounding-box comparisions isn't
feasible. Also, LDAO doesn't do nested files (aka, submodels). Well, it would
do MLCAD submodels, because those are contained in the same .MPD file. But the
LDAO Mover doesn't do subfiles in multi-DAT-file models. Each DAT has to be
addressed individually.
> And while we're whinging about this area, can we get the rotation entry
> bug fixed? I want to not have to remember the rotation I last gave a
> part when I get the dialog box with the angles in x,y,and z up... let me
> just bump it a degree in one axis...
I find the rotation very confusing. Sounds like rotation in MLCAD is based on
the default orientation of the part, rather than the current orientation.
LEdit rotations are calculated like:
<New Orientation> = <Current Orientation> * <New rotation>
MLCAD rotations seem to be calculated like:
<New Orientation> = <New rotation> * <Current Orientation>
[snipped stuff about finding parts, and parts catalog organization]
Hopefully, finding parts will be easier once LDAO, LDList, and MLCAD all
implement inter-program drag'n'drop for parts.
> The VEC lets you recategorize to your hearts content, you can refile
> parts under whatever subcategories (and you can create new ones, too)
> you like. That may or may not be a good thing, it means that if Mike
> sits down in front of my MLCad with this categorization thing working,
> he won't be able to find ANY parts because I will have filed them in
> weird places.
Mike can always select "Restore Default Categories" on the VEC.
> I actually don't think we have a huge list for a program at this point
> in it's lifecycle. I would say that the fact that the list is so short
> is a testament to how good it is (I have been on projects (as a peon,
> certainly not projects I PMed or Architected :-) ) where the feature
> wishlist was in the hundreds)...
Very true.
> When the colors pop up, tell me the LDraw color numbers. Also, let me
> pick 16 as a special choice. I can't right now tell if it's one of the
> grays, not there at all or what. (I may hack around and try to figure it
> out but I haven't yet)
Ooo, yes, to both of these.
Steve
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: MLCad wishlist
|
| (...) maybe I'm confusing myself. at different times I have different needs. During model design it is handy to have many subfiles as you can segment your work. When I am all done with a model, I'd like to take the MPD and create a model file from (...) (25 years ago, 29-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
| | | Re: MLCad wishlist (was Re: Ice Cream
|
| Hi everybody. This is my first post on Lugnet :-) I just discovered MLcad (and LDraw) a few days ago. And I jumped in joy. I believe that it is nearly 20 years since I played with Lego. (...) As fare as I remembers, A*B is equals to B*A :-) But I (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: MLCad wishlist (was Re: Ice Cream
|
| (...) Thanks for the detailed commentary, and of course I have comments on your comments. I have snipped a lot of stuff so readers who come in late should re-read Mike's post, where I agreed with him I just cut it away in a lot of cases. (...) It (...) (25 years ago, 28-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
28 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
