Well the truth is due to the new availability of continue mode for constraints (relations) adding coincidence can now be much faster. And in this mode you have to select 2 points to produce something. The pop-up window scenario therefore can't happen. But if you use the "old approach" and select only one point the tool will produce a pop-up window that doesn't do much. In this "mini-use-case" i am guessing FreeCAD could assume origin to be the second point. But said that i can continue to use FreeCAD just fine if that doesn't happen.abdullah wrote:The question is, it is a common operation to make points coincident with the origin? In my workflow, either it gets constrained via "autoconstraints" on creation or it is extremely rare that I have to do this operation. If it is worth in your workflow, then I can implement it, it is not that it would take me more than 10 minutes.
Sketcher mini-features
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Re: Sketcher mini-features
Re: Sketcher mini-features
At a first glance I do not think it is something to consider at the moment of the creation of the constraints, as it is a visualization issue. It would appear that is something that should be tackled at ViewProvider level. In any case, I will add this to my mini-feature list.wmayer wrote: However, one nuisance is still that the constraint symbols are coincident. Look at the following situation:Now the two symbols that set the distance to the origin exactly overlap and I wonder if this can be avoided.
- Draw a vertical line
- If not automatically done set the vertical constraint to be sure the line is really vertical
- Remove the vertical constraint
- Select the two end points of the line and the origin
- Apply the lock constraint
Re: Sketcher mini-features
In the new workflow, sometimes it has happened to me that sometimes I miss the autoconstraint when hitting the mouse button. This is why I find DeepSOIC's idea more useful for a final user in today's workflow. Only if I could steal his idea and implement it as a mini-feature!!triplus wrote:Well the truth is due to the new availability of continue mode for constraints (relations) adding coincidence can now be much faster. And in this mode you have to select 2 points to produce something. The pop-up window scenario therefore can't happen.
Re: Sketcher mini-features
This one?abdullah wrote:This is why I find DeepSOIC's idea more useful for a final user in today's workflow. Only if I could steal his idea and implement it as a mini-feature!!
And if yes while in continue mode or always? This proposal is on a totally different level. My was after one specific use-case where eliminating pop-up by doing a reasonable thing was proposed. But this follow up proposal is way more aggressive and a whole lot of assumption would need to happen. Why would FreeCAD assume the nearest point is what user is after? The chance user is not after such result is too high in my opinion for FreeCAD to make such assumptions. And if FreeCAD does something often and the end user didn't expected the outcome. That doesn't come down to FreeCAD behaving smart anymore.DeepSOIC wrote:I would like it to find the closest point and get coincident to it. Also some smartness is due. So that it doesn't suddenly make a redundant coincident between points that have tangent connection applied already... and doesn't throw that point off the screen because the closest point happened to be so far away...
- DeepSOIC
- Veteran
- Posts: 7896
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:45 am
- Location: used to be Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Re: Sketcher mini-features
I don't see how it is more aggressive. It still eliminates the pop-up, it still does something reasonable (and I think way more reasonable than making coincident to origin, which is rarely an intention). But I agree that with continue modes, regular modes, and maybe this, the behavior is getting horribly horribly complicated.triplus wrote:My was after one specific use-case where eliminating pop-up by doing a reasonable thing was proposed. But this follow up proposal is way more aggressive
Re: Sketcher mini-features
Currently we have a pop-up that doesn't do much in one specific use-case and only when not using continue mode. Therefore this is rather isolated and predictable use-case. If single point is selected the assumption origin is the second point is in my opinion reasonable. Instead of creating the pop-up. As i don't always create geometry like arcs with center point coincident to origin. And when working on it i do sometimes decide center point should be coincident to origin. But OK as you say it is not reasonable for FreeCAD to make assumption like that. I can cope with that and say lets forget about the proposal altogether.DeepSOIC wrote:I don't see how it is more aggressive. It still eliminates the pop-up, it still does something reasonable (and I think way more reasonable than making coincident to origin, which is rarely an intention). But I agree that with continue modes, regular modes, and maybe this, the behavior is getting horribly horribly complicated.triplus wrote:My was after one specific use-case where eliminating pop-up by doing a reasonable thing was proposed. But this follow up proposal is way more aggressive
As for the other part when you say if we take this idea and multiply the use-cases by 100 to make it more reasonable. And assume user always wants the nearest point when adding coincidence. If such behaviour would be the default behaviour i can imagine we would get complaints often. That is what i said is not reasonable. Assumption user always wants to add coincidence to nearest point. When in continue mode and if user decides (for example modifier key) use the nearest point. That would add complexity that much is true. But i guess it wouldn't change the current default experience. Or i guess another command for coincidence where selecting a single point in the first place is expected. And the nearest point is after being used as a second point.
P.S. And what if there is no second point? Produce a pop-up or use origin? As you can see my proposal was/is more of a mini-feture. Where 99% of use-cases are already resolved and there is just that single pop-up dialog use-case scenario left. But OK the pop-up dialog should stay and i am OK with that!
Re: Sketcher mini-features
DeepSOIC wrote:I don't see how it is more aggressive. It still eliminates the pop-up, it still does something reasonable (and I think way more reasonable than making coincident to origin, which is rarely an intention). But I agree that with continue modes, regular modes, and maybe this, the behavior is getting horribly horribly complicated.
Well in my workflow (maybe my pulse trembles too much), DeepSOIC's idea makes sense. I was thinking only for non-continue mode (only for the traditional select+click button or hit key, which is what I mostly use). If I have to think of hitting shift, wait no it was ctrl, lets look at the status bar... then I may well click the second point and get it over with.triplus wrote:Currently we have a pop-up that doesn't do much in one specific use-case and only when not using continue mode. Therefore this is rather isolated and predictable use-case. If single point is selected the assumption origin is the second point is in my opinion reasonable. Instead of creating the pop-up. As i don't always create geometry like arcs with center point coincident to origin. And when working on it i do sometimes decide center point should be coincident to origin. But OK as you say it is not reasonable for FreeCAD to make assumption like that. I can cope with that and say lets forget about the proposal altogether.DeepSOIC wrote:I don't see how it is more aggressive. It still eliminates the pop-up, it still does something reasonable (and I think way more reasonable than making coincident to origin, which is rarely an intention). But I agree that with continue modes, regular modes, and maybe this, the behavior is getting horribly horribly complicated.triplus wrote:My was after one specific use-case where eliminating pop-up by doing a reasonable thing was proposed. But this follow up proposal is way more aggressive
As for the other part when you say if we take this idea and multiply the use-cases by 100 to make it more reasonable. And assume user always wants the nearest point when adding coincidence. If such behaviour would be the default behaviour i can imagine we would get complaints often. That is what i said is not reasonable. Assumption user always wants to add coincidence to nearest point. When in continue mode and if user decides (for example modifier key) use the nearest point. That would add complexity that much is true. But i guess it wouldn't change the current default experience. Or i guess another command for coincidence where selecting a single point in the first place is expected. And the nearest point is after being used as a second point.
P.S. And what if there is no second point? Produce a pop-up or use origin? As you can see my proposal was/is more of a mini-feture. Where 99% of use-cases are already resolved and there is just that single pop-up dialog use-case scenario left. But OK the pop-up dialog should stay and i am OK with that!
Nevertheless, from the feedback I see that it is a much more complicated issue regarding user experience and that what may seem as an advantage for some users is a disadvantage for others. There is no need to bring complexity if there is not an obvious general advantage.
Re: Sketcher mini-features
Or a new and separate command for adding coincidence by selecting a point and automatically using the nearest point. If implemented it should work in the same way when using continue mode.abdullah wrote:Well in my workflow (maybe my pulse trembles too much), DeepSOIC's idea makes sense. I was thinking only for non-continue mode (only for the traditional select+click button or hit key, which is what I mostly use). If I have to think of hitting shift, wait no it was ctrl, lets look at the status bar... then I may well click the second point and get it over with.
Nevertheless, from the feedback I see that it is a much more complicated issue regarding user experience and that what may seem as an advantage for some users is a disadvantage for others. There is no need to bring complexity if there is not an obvious general advantage.
P.S. But note that this is a totally new feature suggestion. It isn't directly related to my original suggestion. My original suggestion would still apply for such command. What to do when no nearest point can be found? Produce a pop-up or use origin instead.
Re: Sketcher mini-features
May i ask why it is only about coincidence??
The same issues appear on almost every other constraint.
When creating constraints specially with dimensions the lines are moving around and then the closest point is not always the closest point anymore.
So i prefer a task menu for selected constraint what have added the selected point or line and where you have to add the other elements.
The same issues appear on almost every other constraint.
When creating constraints specially with dimensions the lines are moving around and then the closest point is not always the closest point anymore.
So i prefer a task menu for selected constraint what have added the selected point or line and where you have to add the other elements.
Re: Sketcher mini-features
It is the point that is the closest in the moment you invoke the command and just then. Afterwards it is just a coincidence constraint.Jee-Bee wrote:May i ask why it is only about coincidence??
The same issues appear on almost every other constraint.
When creating constraints specially with dimensions the lines are moving around and then the closest point is not always the closest point anymore.
So i prefer a task menu for selected constraint what have added the selected point or line and where you have to add the other elements.