Improve Facing Op (and others?)

[Wsk8]

I agree that MillFace (and the other ops) are limited when it comes to extending beyond boundaries but I don't think your proposed solution gets us any closer. Extending in X or Y direction doesn't give enough control if the face that needs to be extended isn't aligned that way or the clearing pattern is more complex.

I suspect we need a better way, in general, for the user to describe the area to be cleared or to build 'helper objects'.

Yes, my solution doesn't solve all problems, but it will at least improve the current situation.
And i opened this thread to discuss this topic and find a good/the best solution to improve FC.

mfg

[herbk]

I'm not even sure how "extend X/Y/etc" is less of a "dirty hack" than the rest of the solutions

Hm... If i want to remove the corners (i'm thinkinking like the machine can do (or i manual do) that) i have two posibilitys:
Go to the corner and do a dogbone operation
or
set the outer path to the center of the endmill.

So both solutions seems not to be a workaround to me....

[chrisb]

These are just dirty workarounds like i've mentioned.

It may be a workaround, but there is nothing dirty.

How should FC improve, if every suggestion for improvement is neglected with just saying "Use this workaround and it will somehow work..."?

That is easy to answer with an old FreeCAD slogan: Stop whining, start coding.

[mlampert]

Yes, my solution doesn't solve all problems, but it will at least improve the current situation.
And i opened this thread to discuss this topic and find a good/the best solution to improve FC.

Have you looked at the Extensions in PocketShape? The reason we haven't added that to any of the other ops is because there was (literally) no feedback if that approach works or not. From the sounds of it though, your proposal pretty much goes into that direction.