CAD Forum

AlexLachance wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 11:07 am Little suggestion. Use undo rather then unsupress.

Undo will bring the child features back to unsupressed.

Unsupress won't unsupress the child features, because the feature you are unsuppressing does not require those features to generate itself. You could unsupress the lowest feature and it would most likely do the result you desire too.

I know it doesn't sound logical to you, but it's logical in terms of operation for the program and programming.

@AlexLachance so SW devs really made the undo command working as expected ?
it is a serious concern as there are still instances that are simply ignored during the undo, so the undo does not relly... well undo wht you have done.

mp3-250 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2024 5:43 am @AlexLachance so SW devs really made the undo command working as expected ?
it is a serious concern as there are still instances that are simply ignored during the undo, so the undo does not relly... well undo wht you have done.

Sometimes it works as expected, other times it doesn't lol

The worst case is when it doesn't undo the command you want, but the one prior to that which took 10 minutes to create. And Redo won't bring it back.

I have fond hopes that at some time in the distant future (but not too distant because I plan to retire in 2028) when we suppress a feature in a Part, and it has children further down in the tree, we will have a System Option to have those features remain active, but showing errors, instead of being automatically suppressed.

That would make it much easier to find the references and delete them, instead of having to unsuppress everything, find the relations, hope you got all of them, and then repeat the process as many times as needed until you actually got all of them.

Glenn Schroeder wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2024 8:45 am I have fond hopes that at some time in the distant future (but not too distant because I plan to retire in 2028) when we suppress a feature in a Part, and it has children further down in the tree, we will have a System Option to have those features remain active, but showing errors, instead of being automatically suppressed.

That would make it much easier to find the references and delete them, instead of having to unsuppress everything, find the relations, hope you got all of them, and then repeat the process as many times as needed until you actually got all of them.

It may be simpler to use a different CAD system.

mp3-250 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2024 5:43 am @AlexLachance so SW devs really made the undo command working as expected ?
it is a serious concern as there are still instances that are simply ignored during the undo, so the undo does not relly... well undo wht you have done.

jcapriotti wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2024 3:48 pm SE isn't showing a warning or error that I see, just the link icon if you edit the sketch, but its not obvious that its connected to anything. I guess its remembers the edge from history that isn't there anymore? Not really sure how I feel about that, like its linked to a ghost I can't see anymore.

The SW rebuild thing is an issue although minor in this case. Guess I've just gotten used to using on Force Rebuild instead of the faster regular rebuild. Unless you are doing extremely complex models with hundreds of features, force rebuild is a better option and about as quick. You can add the Force Rebuild icon to your toolbar.

image.png

Yes it seem odd from the first look but if you start think deeper into it....
If the user want to fill in the feature that its geometry is referenced later down the stream its he/her problem if they delete the link to the "ghost" element
Was a bit curios how SE would behave when I tested this out and my first impression was like yours.
"Hmm this could maybe be a problem ..."

But what happens if we delete or supress the cutout feature that is referenced later down the tree (who is current fillled in) ?
Supress will indeed generate error (but best of all leave the referenced features unsupressed).

Hovering over the error feature reveals the error.
Hovering over the "fill in" feature also give the answer on the error. In this case it will not modify the part.
And in the errored Protrusion 3 sketch we easy see what element is causing the error by its colour.

No time consuming guessing and testing is needed. The error is given both in text and graphics for the user to fix or if lazy leave as is.

SW gives somewhere between zero and nothing with help for the end user on this topic.

bnemec wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2024 9:26 am It may be simpler to use a different CAD system.

Did you see the part about retiring in four years? It would likely take me nearly that long to become proficient with the new software (which would likely have its own problems).

IMHO at SW someone had the idea to simply hide what on other cad would simply show as an error. So no matter how dangerous, potentially illogical or simply wrong, action we performed the tree is SHOWN as error free, withou bad red icons that are a sore in the eye if you use another CAD.
like orphaned mates are silently suppressed and hidden under the rug instead of show as an error with a simple system option.

no error message = noproblem right?

bnemec wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2024 9:29 amimage.png

sometimes I forgot that I am using SW and press CTRL+Z out of habit and regretting it like 0.1 seconds later...

bnemec wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2024 12:35 pm Shouldn't need to train people not to hammer screws or nuts.

But it works! Why can't I use it?

BY the way once the head (screw not hammer) is stripped, the hammer is about all that is left!

DLZ_SWX_User wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2024 8:35 am But it works! Why can't I use it?

BY the way once the head (screw not hammer) is stripped, the hammer is about all that is left!

You bring up a good point to continue the metaphor. While knowing the difference between a screw and nail should either be common sense or covered in 8th grade shop class, all the various tips and tricks of not stripping out the drive are part of "skilled labor", rather basic skilled labor, but requires some level of training and experience nevertheless. Hold driver at correct angle, apply axial force that is proportional to torque applied, use correct side driver bit, don't use worn driver bit. We could go on but I think you all can imagine how to apply the metaphor to everything from carpentry to CAD Modeling.

Thinking about it more, I'm pretty sure using a screw with a driver is easier that driving a nail with a hammer. The nail and hammer required much more skill and practice, especially in 100 year dried oak framing.

bnemec wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2024 9:42 am Thinking about it more, I'm pretty sure using a screw with a driver is easier that driving a nail with a hammer. The nail and hammer required much more skill and practice, especially in 100 year dried oak framing.

That's not what Mr. Miyagi taught us:
https://o.quizlet.com/53mGL7DkhPy.T6F-Q4buMQ.gif