chrisb wrote: ↑Fri Oct 15, 2021 7:39 am
I found a related issue: Finding missing coincidences shows in the attached sketch 1 open, where 0 would be correct, and 2 would be consistent.Bildschirmfoto 2021-10-15 um 09.39.14.png
chrisb wrote: ↑Fri Oct 15, 2021 1:08 pm
Here is a slightly modified sketch. It correctly pads perfectly, yet Validate Sketch shows a missing coincidence. It can of course be ignored here, and I prefer to have false positives instead of missed hits, but if there are a lot more of really missing coincidences they can only be fixed automatically when this one is (mal-)fixed too - which then needs editing in sketcher again.
Surprisingly by making the diagonal construction geometry the false Open vertex vanishes.
I think it would at least be worth a feature request, if not a minor bug report.
chrisb, could you split your 2 quoted posts as well as this answer into a separate topic ?
Actually these are really 2 separate issues.
On "Find missing coincidences", the actual problem is that transitivity of coincidence between points isn't managed (at all).
So depending on which order you set your constraints, you can be lucky or not.
I didn't find a reliable way ATM to create a faulty example from scratch using the GUI, but you have to believe me because I debugged the code based on your 1st example.
If needed, I could pretty easily generate a faulty sketch using Python API.
It could look simple to enhance, but can be a bit of code so I guess it's worth a ticket.
If needed, I can give some more details about what happens internally with your file once topic is splitted.