Jump to content
Developer Wiki and Function Reference Links ×

VectorScriot or ...


Recommended Posts

A question about the VS Editor... I hear some of you say that you don't use the VS Editor but a text editor with a VS language module. I too use Notepad++ with such a module at work and it does work great but one thing that i miss the most is a way to compile my scripts... So, is there a way to do this in one of those text editors? If so, i too would leave the VS Editor for what it is and use a text editor.

I thought that DE didn't want to make pio's in VS? They did hate it a while back...

Link to comment

@TheBlindExpert @maarten - I make a lot of use of Tools > Scripts > VS Compiler Mode during development ... it tells Vectorworks to re-compile every time the PIO is inserted. Turn this on, then just leave the VW script window open while you work on the code in your external program. If you've used {$INCLUDE whatever} and the right compiler mode, you should be able to save, switch to VW, hit compile, switch back to the editor, edit, save, back to VW, compile...

Link to comment

Just to chip in here concerning Vlad's first question. For myself the most important feature of VS compared with SDK is that VS is (mostly) platform-agnostic. There's already enough hassle taking care of all the peccadilloes of different VW versions thanks to the lack of conditional compilation directives in VS. If I moved to SDK every release would need twice as much work.

A language with better facilities and a more advanced IDE ( dialog builders, oop etc. ) would be just great but I think it must be cross-platform like VS.



Link to comment
  • Vectorworks, Inc Employee

Just informational (this is the VS forum anyway), but SDK does have much better support for popup value list, also dynamic popup value list. Also it has much easier XML API for configuration files. The SDK is OS independent, as long as you can handle two different compilers. The only drawback maybe is that it uses C++.

You can tell I like the SDK, eh ;)

Link to comment
  • Vectorworks, Inc Employee
What a coincidence: an end user would just like to change the names of User fields in the Door tool, but that is no longer possible. Is this really progress? Methinks not.

Well, but that's not problem of the SDK, it's a problem of the plug-in's design. But yes, I know what you mean ... VS is more user friendly :)

Link to comment
  • 4 weeks later...
Guest Mark Flamer

I agree that no matter which direction NV decides to go with this topic, VS should continue to be developed. I would really like to see more commands to help develop parametric 3D objects. On my list are,

-3D Control points

-Access to commands in the 3D powerpack without "DoMenuTextByName"

-Access to other 3D tools like "Shell Solids" and "Fillet"

-More robust methods of resetObject from one PIO to another

-Some method of passing values from one PIO to another without using external files or worksheet fields.

My list could go on but these are some off the top of my head.

Link to comment
  • 5 weeks later...
how many of you would be interested in switching to C#, VisualBasic, Python, Java, F# or what ever language there is these days?


Time, lack of it, is the only hindrance. Wish me to be unemployed again or to have a new little child justifying some time off work.

VS could be frozen on my opinion and I would go for anything new there was.


"Now, bring me that horizon" (JS)

Link to comment
Guest Mark Flamer

I have also been using XML as a method of storing and passing data globally. It seems to be pretty fast when the XML file is kept in memory and allows more complex and organized data structures. The non-attached record fields is a good method I was not previously aware of. Lately, I would say the most important addition to VS would be 3D control points and more types of 3D PIO templates. I think this is seriously holding back the potential of our objects. Even the "Framing Member" and "column" objects are stuck in 2.5D without the ability to dynamicly adjust the height using control points. Also, please make "extrude along path" utilize the Parasolids kernel and give us solids instead of a bunch of Nurbs surfaces (and I don't mean "CreateCustomObject" either), infact, why don't you just give us direct access to the entire parasolids library! :-) I know that's not possible but we can dream!

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...