What an idiotic retort. It's not about religious fervour (what a stupid idea), it's about pragmatism and peace of mind. I won't use a crappy OS at home simply because 90% of people use it, it's a bad reason. And I would wager that if computers had existed in Galileo's time, he wouldn't have used the OS everybody used, as it would have been blind conformism.
Sorry, you are right. I suggest you ask a moderator to split all the off-topic discussion starting from whichever post you prefer.
freecad-heini-1 wrote: Wilfried
easyw-fc wrote: ↑Tue Apr 03, 2018 1:52 pmmay be @Wilfried could find this usefulHi Maurice,freecad-heini-1 wrote: Wilfried
very great. I like it!!!
I'm a bit drunken this night. After singing in a choir we had a very special drink. It's called force apart haunch.
First put a teaspoon sugar in your mouth, next a schnapps glass with lemon juice, and then a vodka. Mix it in your mouth and then swallow it. Three are absolute enough.
Nice!easyw-fc wrote: ↑Tue Apr 03, 2018 1:52 pmI improved the Aligner and Mover to manage also Solidworks STEP files, which, when imported, will have a cylinder with a seam edge divided in two semi-circles... that case was difficult to align and move in my previous release ... but now it is handled fine
I also improved the Undo of the aligner to handle more undo steps.
Here a small screencast with a robotic finger to show the WB's new abilities...
This WB is aimed to help in create assemblies of Objects (Part Design Next and Body included) but without the need/ability to add fixed constrains...Turro75 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 08, 2018 12:30 pmI'm start thinking a way to make this a solid base for a simple assembly wb.
Do You think it makes sense creating a virtual object in the tree that stores the relevant info of the just done align or move action? (i.e objectA, ObjectB, setup of each parameter)
a specific button would repeat the stored alignment at any time.
What about storing these objects in a tree which defines the sequence of execution? So You can change the order, delete them, etc...
In these way it would be possible creating a sort of constrained assembly.
Hoping it doesn't look a silly proposal...