> Groups are something that I never finished implementing What was your original goal for groups?
I don't think there is a problem with groups as they are (perhaps some additional internal structure to make it more efficient to isolate groups instead of scanning the whole piece list - but I also like the coherence of having just one list.) All that seems to be lacking are (1) information to make the user aware of how the operations are applied, and (2) consistency in how operations are applied. If I knew render view operations would always apply to invisible pieces of a group, and there was something to tip me off that there are invisible pieces in my selection, I'd be satisfied. I do sometimes wish I could position a sub-group. The group toolbar is a way to do the selection, but the core logic that I didn't want to change is not aware of how to operate at a specific group level. That seems like an easy change. Also, multiple views of the data are a big help in understanding your model and manipulating pieces within the group irrespective of how they are represented in some other view. - Rod ________________________________ > Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 17:04:24 -0800 > Subject: Re: Patch: Group Toolbar > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > CC: [email protected] > > I was on vacation and I'm just catching up with my emails. > > The reason why there are steps and frames is because LeoCAD used to > have an animation mode where you could create simple animations using > key frames and you could create animations and instructions in the same > file. I've decided to remove it because it's not the main focus of the > application (building instructions) so it adds to confusion and feature > bloat. > > Groups are something that I never finished implementing, it's weird to > have objects that are not visible be part of a group because it's not > clear what should happen when you move the group. If you don't move the > hidden objects the group will be wrong later but if you move them then > you're moving something that's not visible. > > To be honest I think groups shouldn't exist in their current form, > having a parenting system could be a better way solve the problem > because pieces would always be relative to their parent so moving the > parent automatically moves its children, even if they are hidden and > more complicated groups that need multiple steps would be sub-models > instead. I was actually implementing this system in my current work > branch > (svn.leocad.org/branches/model<http://svn.leocad.org/branches/model>). > > BTW, I usually develop new features in a separate branch so please post > something if you plan on writing big features so we can try to avoid > conflicts. > > _______________________________________________ Leocad mailing list [email protected] https://list.gerf.org/listinfo/leocad
