Kool Aid

An Architect who draws reinforcements is a fool. Surely in most countries one has to have a certified engineer to do computations and to determine the reinforcements? That includes other things in addition to the bars. Miraculously, reinforced concrete structures have been built for 150 years without modeling rebars. Daresay, the blokes on the site are quite capable of interpreting and adapting fairly schematic, old fashioned drawings.

Have to spoil the party? While I'd love to have some 3D-dimensioning, we have to keep in mind that eg. angular 3D-dimensioning is anything but unambiguous and straightforward. It may work in trivial cases of simple 3D-forms in rectilinear x/y -coordinate systems, but what would eg. be the ?angle? between two ramps that are not parallel? The angle can only be determined in & for a particular projection. It is unfortunate that the tools shipping with VW cannot show (read: tag) the ?vertical? angle of eg. a roof face (which otherwise is quite useful for simple ramps of arbitrary shapes.)

Ahh, of course! I was a bit curious?? I love ornamental grasses! Had the great pleasure to work several times in Australia with a native plant specialist who really knew his grasses both ecologically and artistically.

Vague indeed and the conditions are in this respect potentially different for dongled and non-dongled versions. While I'm not a lawyer, I would be surprised if any court would consider the two copies a violation of the licence. Besides, I can't believe NNA would be that petty: in general, VW licence is quite user-friendly. Maybe an official spokesperson for Nemetschek North America could chime in? Preferences are an interesting issue: if the two copies are run under different users, they have separate preferences; if under one, they share them, with the potential for havoc. I've chosen the two users -approach, because then I can optimise the prefences as applicable for the two purposes. At ?work? I have eg. 3D resolution as ?low?, at the ?render farm? ?very high?. And so on. Works beaut!

Hear, hear! (To our American friends ? now, bare with me ? here, here!)

I think this is one of the best concepts introduced to VW in a long time! Hopefully it will be expanded. I have a really hard time with prospective users who, to get wall styles, two-way worksheets and IFC, have to buy tons of McMansion-crap. They don't want to spend money in useless American doors, windows, stairs, bell towers, title blocks, issue management systems etc etc. and thus subsidise the tiny minority of users.

Tough. Do you by any chance charge money for your work?

Elementary, dear monkey, elementary.

[sarcasm] Do they? If, why would it be possible for me to run (at least) two ?copies? of VW simultaneously & concurrently on one machine, with one licence? [/sarcasm] What I described above is, I believe, a little known fact, but a fact nevertheless. Now, in my line(s) of work, the Hardware mainly sits and waits for the 50+ year old Wetware to instruct the Software. There's plenty of time for the Other VW/RW to do it's magic.

I think Mr./Ms./Miss bonus gives us a way too bleak picture of the situation. One can have (at least) two copies of VW running concurrently: one for rendering, one for working. You only have to (and should) duplicate the actual application inside the VW folder. Use one, render with the other one. Like this: Hunky dory.

OK. The serial number is not stored in the said file, but maybe there are other considerations. Anyway: since the settings are a simple XML-file, it should be very easy to have an option to use old settings.

Why didn't I know that? Thanks: looks very promising! Not that I would not regularly create PIOs within PIOs, but didn't realise that EAP is a custom object. It turns out that there is a deeper and an even more mysterious problem: a variable (real), based on a parameter and set only once (made 100% sure of that) becomes zero when some totally unrelated (boolean) parameters are changed. I decided to start the making latest additions & changes again from an older version. Haven't had a case of PIO corruption in a long time! EDIT Excellent: it works and is a lot faster than the other approach. Makes a difference in things like this:

I'm "so glad? to hear that you have problems, too? Shared misery is better than the solitary variety? The path is, as such, received, but then converted: ????path := CONVERTTONURBS(received_object, FALSE); No, now I misspoke: there is also a condition of ????path := CREATENURBSCURVE(x1, 0, z1, TRUE, 2); Unlike interactive mode, with VS the result of CREATEEXTRUDEALONGPATH is a bunch of NURBS-surfaces, so I ???BEGINGROUP; ?????h :=?CREATEEXTRUDEALONGPATH(); ???ENDGROUP ; In three PIOs*, a locus after this and PREVOBJ(LNEWOBJ) give me a handle to the group for further processing**, in the problem one not. The handle does not work either way ? or, actually, works with a new instance until? Ah well. Fortunately this is not a particularly complex PIO: only about 100 subroutines and 3000 lines of code. *) This is purely a coincidence, not a punic reference to C-3PO **) Even NAMECLASS does not put the individual surfaces to the desired class, so I have to process them. As I have to assume that other NURBS-surfaces may one day be generated, in any which order, I can't use object type to set class.

I know it's something I've done, but just in case: I added a couple of subroutines to a perfectly good PIO; ones that work just fine in others. They use my ?standard? global handles (and other variables) and then local handles for their internal workings. Those have generic names (h1, h2, h3 etc.) that are not global handle var names. For a couple of runs, everything is hunky dory. Then, when I change a value that relates only to another subroutine, the said local handles in the sub in question cease to work, ie. nothing happens. I am 99% certain that I don't use or change global handles in a way that should affect my problem, which is very much related to the very badly implemented call object_of_my_desire := CREATEEXTRUDEALONGPATH(path, profile); (In the sub in question path is received, profile generated.) Any comments?

Did you try to copy the file ?Vectorworks Preferences.xml? from the old app support folder to the new one? /Users/[you]/Library/Application Support/VectorWorks/2009/Settings/Vectorworks Preferences.xml

It's not that simple. You'll need to get Computers Unlimited to contact Ultirender, the Finnish VW distributor, to localise and supply the tool in collaboration. It might, however, be realistic if there even 100 or 200 buyers.

Here in the land of Sanity Clause we have a window tool capable of that.

I believe ?Triangulate to Preseve Fills? is for that purpose.

The notation is quite demanding as comes to syntactic precision. A range is "..", a direct reference ? hello! is it ":". I thought that was "." (worksheetName.cellReference). Well, whichever.

Using symbols means, I believe, that you won't be able to generate valid IFC-files. In any real BIM, all objects must have unique and persistent IDs (UUIDs). I can't see how that could be achieved with symbols.

Exactly? Why can't we view (at least) a[n unstyled] wall in 3D and just drag the components to our liking. Besides, why can't an unstyled wall be an instance of a wall style: inheriting pertinent properties of the Class of Wall Style (no, I'm not referring to VW's ?classes? but OOP-classes), allowing one manipulate eg. dimensional properties of the wall object. Whoops! Here I assume that wall instances ARE indeed REAL objects (OOP classes). Maybe they aren't, in which case they cannot inherit properties in a controlled manner. Have I ever mentioned that Hungary, the Home of ArchiCAD, has for decades been a leading country in ?real? Object Oriented Programming? Maryland has not.

May be. You must be one of the many people who cannot use more than one screwdriver, regardless. In fact, you are likely to prefer the so-called Russian screwdriver, also known as the hammer: the problem of choice for those who only know nails.

Here I must agree with Jeffrey! (Odd, indeed.) Now, the (i) 2D-representation of a stair can (and should) be independent from (ii) 3D and especially (iii) the ?BIM?. Item (ii) is pretty much universal. Item (i) is very much country-dependent. Item (iii) is both country and client-dependent. All the well-meaning proposals here are applicable only to trivial cases. The really complex cases would require very advanced data structures and even ?artificial intelligence?; at least Rules. Trust me.

I believe you should have received a new serial number. The last six characters, I further believe, should be the same as before.

You do.