Dieter @ DWorks

Hi, There is an option for a section DLVP to have it as a 2D projected object, which could be nice, but apparently, you can't have it rendered in hidden line, which make it useless for having a section or elevation of your model as a base to further work on it. As it is now, you can only use it for a real section where you only want to see the actual cut objects. So make it useful for all other situations by adding a background render to it for hidden line etc....

Apple... I Always hear about how good apple software is, but the standard in Apple are non-dockable windows....

I would not say a new one is needed, only an enhanced one. I don't prefer tabs, but a good option would be that we can have those as separate palettes and docked where we want, either next to each other, or tabbed. I don't understand this one...? Totally agree with this one. It would be very nice to work on one view, and see your changes in other views automatically, like the elevations for example. Even if we can't work in them, just a view of those would be great! This isn't true! This is one of these discussions that will never stop and are all around the net. It's not that it's better for the eyes, it's just a personal preference. So the option to have either a dark or light interface would be better. Some sort of enhancement for the feature we already have to turn the background black? This one has been asked a long time, and from what I could understand, will be in the next version. It just needs to be way better to edit, find, manage resources.

I have a free tool to draw a list of all the classes in the document, or make a symbol out of it, in order to print or populate a worksheet with it. The symbol can be referenced to automatically import all classes in other drawings like your library files: http://dworks.azurewebsites.net/Products/Plug-Ins/DListClasses/?locale=en_US

:cry: I have experienced this the other way around. I worked at an office with both Mac and Win, and the Mac versions all had several problems with VW, while the Win ones didn't had any, or sporadically. I think it also greatly depends on the hardware you use....

Agreed. One of the main reasons I am here is to stop this from happening. I have seen many excellent features come in either half complete or limited in their functionality and fall by the wayside when they should be some of our best tools. Glad to hear there was a wake-up call. Maybe we will see better implementations and some tools finally finish in the next version(s).

I don't think we should be that hard on them (though it is frustrating) I think it is proof of the (time) pressure they are under to deliver too much too soon. 'Not a good excuse but a probable reason btw'. The thing that's frustrating me about such things is that they are never solved in later versions. They put something in, half-done or 'completely' wrong, and then go on, never to finish it. There are a lot of things in VW, like wall recess, ... I think it would be far better to implement the basics first and add in later versions.

Can't you use a tile fill? I think it will be quicker, unless it's different for every wall...

Also, it can be faster to draw basic shapes and combine/substract them instead of having to define each point.

When you have nothing selected, can you check if the arrows are on in the attributes palette? This causes arrows to appear in many parts of a drawing.

That's far better, as you then also keep the thickness of the finish in your plan views.

You have to make sure all walls are joined correctly and that each room forms a closed space with walls around it. If you do not draw with walls, or because it's an import, the polygon tool also have this flood fill mode.

Shows how bad things are implemented and how bad some choices are. Re-using code is one thing, but doing it all wrong....

I think I also had that some versions ago on Windows 7. Make sure your graphic drivers are up to date. And otherwise, you will only be able to see the result by trying it out. It's a bit more work, but such a thing will not be done daily. Also, submit it please.

I do not see this problems, but I don't do extensive drawing work anymore these days. Make sure your graphics driver is up to date, as that's the cause of 90% of the problems...

Sounds good, still dizzy from her movements....

Hi, have you gave Python a try yet? It's really good and I think very close to what you get with C++. Though you only can use the vs functions, but you can do much more with Python alone.

thx.

If it is only for 3D presentations / or rendered 2D ones, I also would go for the texture solution, fast and no additional work. What I mostly do when having multiple components that are stacked, is create the outer component and use the offsets in the wall style, so that I have one of them correctly drawn with the wall. Then I create the others with other walls on an other layer, so I can put them on when needed. This is the easiest way I found, as walls are easy to edit, and you will get info out of them more easily in worksheets.

I had to make them a lot. The last one I made it with the auto-hybrid. But it sure would be awesome to have it as a roof, especially to connect to other roof planes.

+100. I also encounted this wish while modelling.

Can you specify in more detail what is going wrong? I'm currently writing some scripts in Python and have no problems with it, even loading the tutorial ones.

If there was no restriction to what levels an object can bound to, then this would not be a problem. Levels should not be bound to a story, but just have a Z value. The stories should be made of two z values, and everything in it is in that story.

Personally I think it is more user friendly to add an extra button to go to the next item and have the ok button as some sort of finish button. Or you could use your cancel button as the finish one. Now I think about it, for a tool that sets things, it should be really good, you than have 'Save and next' and 'Finish'. Good thinking.

When the event handler is run (on each event), you get an item and data variable with it. Set that item to -1, so VW doesn't close the dialog. I wonder what you are trying to do? Are you checking the fields if they are correct and if not, you want the user to correct them? This can be done differently and more user friendly. Let me know if you want further info.