For what it's worth, I used groups extensively when building the BI mentioned
here:
http://www.technicbricks.com/2011/08/building-instructions-for-nathanael.html
So they definitely have their use, in the current incarnation (at least, in the
pre-Qt version of LeoCAD).
-- joshua
>________________________________
> From: Leonardo Zide <[email protected]>
>To: Rodney Rushing <[email protected]>
>Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2014 12:23 PM
>Subject: Re: Patch: Group Toolbar
>
>
>
>The original idea was just to make it easier to select pieces that are always
>locked together (like a tire and wheel) and be a replacement for sub-models.
>Maybe groups should have been selection sets instead and have sub-models be
>used for complex groups.
>
>
>And that's why I don't like the current groups, it doesn't replace sub-models
>and doesn't help with selection either because it tries to keep all objects
>selected at the same time.
>
>
>I don't like changing things that aren't visible so you end up being
>inconsistent one way or another. Maybe drawing a faded version of the
>invisible pieces in the group is enough to show what's going on.
>
>
>On the code side groups are a terrible hack also.
>
>
>
>
>
>On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Rodney Rushing <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>> 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
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Leocad mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.gerf.org/listinfo/leocad
