You are right, although I don't think that the order of priorities is important. We can and should, of course, express wishes, but finally it is up to the developer (in this case realthunder) when it is done, and how it fits his overall development process.
Works here: OS: macOS High Sierra (10.13)
one of those would be to be able to extrude (pad ?) a sketch up to a datum plane: today it's not possible.
Sure, but I prefer to discuss over something concrete. I won't insist on my way and my way only. I'll make something for everybody to try and then discuss up on.
That's separate feature quest. I don't think it conflicts with my multi-body plan in any way. I always take backward compatibility as the first priority,
Yes, it can, but in quite different ways. I actually like the PartDesign way more (if implemented right), which is what most other CAD is doing too. As for the interaction with Assembly, my asm3 container is designed without restriction on what type of objects it can contain. The constraining element is abstracted using special type of object that accepts almost any thing. I am not saying that FC's future assembly container should work like this, but it certainly shows that it is possible to keep developing PartDesign now without worrying too much about the assembly.Another big question is: how are Part, Body and Assemblies supposed to interact ? If PartDesign is orphaned code, and since you have spent quite some effort in making App::Part objects App::Link compatible, shouldn't the focus rather go towards the Part workbench ? It can mostly do the same things.
Works for quite a long time => https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic. ... 17#p313150
ah good to know, I hadn't checked recently.openBrain wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2020 9:34 amWorks for quite a long time => https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic. ... 17#p313150
I have one: on my personal Todo list I have an issue that I would like to fix but need a starting point where to look in the code:
That is an excellent thing to do ! I hope you will be able to do that, as it will simplify the workflow for virtually every user of FCuwestoehr wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2020 11:27 amI have one: on my personal Todo list I have an issue that I would like to fix but need a starting point where to look in the code:
- assume you have a cube, then you can select e.g. 5 of its edges and then use the menu PartDesign -> Fillet
result: you get immediately a fillet on all 5 selected edges
- no you have already a document with fillets and you realize that you must fillet e.g. 5 more edges using the same fillet parameters. Therefore you open the existing fillet but then you can only add one edge after another. This is very time consuming (in real life I deal with dozens of filleted edges on every part).
So what I simply want to do is to add the functionality to the fillet dialog to select multiple edged to add them to the fillet.
That's a very good plan! This has been discussed already several times and noone seemed to be very happy with it. Equally or even more cumbersome is the selection mechanism for the patternshaving more than one feature.