user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
I think this suggestion completely is not thought-out.
Well thanks and I think that your comments are not thought-out at all.
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
- which sketch below has 3 lines with a coincident and which has 2 lines with point on object?0.png
This is a made up situation. Hovering on top you would immediatly see if it's 2 or 3 lines with preselection. This is a non-sens argument, it makes no point. Why would you want to know if it's 2 or 3 lines? It's such a rare made up situation that in this case you just put your mouse on one line and see it's 2 separate lines.
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
When all is one constraint (symbol), you can not see any difference, even though both have different meanings and are completely different sketches. For compare, if have made the symbols invisible.
--> bad overview
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
- when you go through the list, because you have a complex sketch, many symbols are the same and you find the target constraint very bad. Also when you use this list, you are probably searching to 90% a coincident or a point on object and then you can not see the difference anymore?2.png
Those two are the same argument.
First I don't say we need separate icons in the backend. My point is that one TOOL should do both constraints.
Second, following you argument, why don't we create more constraints type then? We should have PointToLine and PointToCircle and PointToArc and PointToEllipse. Because the icons would be different so it would be much easier to find the constraints in the solver. How convenient would that be?
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
- regardless from above, when you have 3 lines (or a complex sketch) and you want to delete the coincident of a line, because you want to replace it with more lines or an other object and the rest of them is constraint, all symbols will be congruent, because also all points are coincident, also when they are referred to an other neighbors object. To select and delete the correct constraint will depend on random luck, which is not the sense of CAD using.
--> bad overview,
bad handling, need more time to solve, potential error source.
Sorry what? It's just not understandable. "the coincident of a line"? What does that even mean? Coincidence of a line endpoint to another line endpoint?
Today you have 3 lines which all have a coincidence at an endpoint, if you want to detach one of the lines you already depend on random luck.
If you have one line endpoint which is pointonObject on another line, then even if the constraint symbol is not here (which is not what I asked for again) then you would be able to know which constraint to delete because only one would highlight the endpoint of your line.
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
What is the benefit? It is just annoying, nothing more.
--> bad overview,
bad handling, need more time
--> a good overview is more important then 2 seconds more time to create a sketch, because you always must adapt the sketches and with a good overview, you will benefit more then the 2 seconds, you needed longer to create them.
Yes right. Let's then just in and create PointToLine and PointToCircle and PointToArc and PointToEllipse. I'm sure we could split up a lot more constraint to have a better overview.
Beside AGAIN my point was not to delete the different constraint symbols in the Task Constraints widget, just to merge the two TOOLS together to improve user-friendlyness.
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
- point on object can go over the boundaries of the object, because is is based on the untrimmed base
If this would be a combined object, this would be completely misleading.
No it wont. A point to be concident to the infinite line makes sens.
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
- what is when this happen?
Seriously who does that? Anyway, what happens then when you do that the way you did it? The way it is currently possible to do?
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
If this happens, you will not see the difference, because the symbols are the same. Especially this will affect new users. Maybe this works for rectangles, but with circles, ellipse, splines, etc. i am sot so sure. Also this is a source of errors further operations (similar to bad tangents).
--> potential error source
Again I did not advocate for the deletion of the icon on the viewprovider.
Beside those situation can happen with current pointOnObject constraint. Perhaps the question is rather should double pointOnObject be caught programatically and replaced by coincidence to avoid errors ?
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
Generally: not everything must be for new users. Not for gatekeeping (i also can not place a untrained people to a lathe, only because the lathe has comfort functions; only because CAD is a computer program, does not the damages smaller), just for the correct clean workflow. For that, some information or extra steps are needed. I have too often seen, that comfort functions causes big and expensive issues, more then the little extra steps. Because then users forget or does not recognize to work clean. And the
generally workflow of FreeCAD have the best compromise between cleanness, overview and comfort (bugs, missing features and TNP excluded).
My suggestion is not aimed at new CAD users. But not expert-freecad-users. For the average user of CAD software who comes from paid packages, this is the kind of thing that make life harder than needs to be. If you don't know the shortcuts by heart after 10 years of using freeCad, the fact that there are so many constraint tools is annoying. You have to find the correct icon, click it, go back to the sketch, get an error message because you did not select the correct one, go back try again and so on and so on.
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
And especially the handling of the Sketcher is top notch, especially when you compare it with commercial CADs. And then you must remark that FreeCAD is a FOSS and how well-thought-out this abdullah (many thanks and congrats!) made almost alone. And he had definitively had his reasons, why he made this how it is.
While I agree that FreeCAD has a lot of cool features and that Abdullah made an awesome work with the sketcher. And that commercial CADs also have very annoying stupid UI decision, FreeCAD is not perfect either, and refusing every and any improvement (because yes for everything I offered I got mostly negative comments. Even for the ARC SLOT tool which is totally and completely missing.)
abdullah wrote:Hello!
Could you please advise if there was a reason for making coincident and pointOnObject separate tools or if it was mostly because it was handled differently by the solver that they end up separated?
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
tldr: merging constraints only for a few seconds (which i lost after create the objects and constraints) and new users makes no sense.
Small streams make big rivers.
user1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 11:51 pm
btw: this should not be the reason but, what will you do with old files?
Again I didn't said to delete the backend of both constraints, only the icon tool. So there isn't so much code that'd become obsolete.
Not thought-out... Yeah thanks.
Anyway I don't care keep it as is if you want, its not such a big deal. I didn't expected people to go crazy on this kind of discussion.