LDraw.org Discussion Forums
LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans - Printable Version

+- LDraw.org Discussion Forums (https://forums.ldraw.org)
+-- Forum: LDraw Programs (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-7.html)
+--- Forum: LDraw Editors and Viewers (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-11.html)
+--- Thread: LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans (/thread-18426.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20


Re: LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans - Philippe Hurbain - 2016-01-06

BTW Milan, what do you use to capture screen video, camstudio? something else?


Re: LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans - Merlijn Wissink - 2016-01-06

Maybe a bit unrelated to this topic, but the rare times I need to make a screen-capture, I use OBS.
Altough it's more targeted at (game) streaming, it works perfectly fine for just capturing the screen. It has loads of options and it is completely free. Smile


Re: LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans - Milan Vančura - 2016-01-06

Thanks Merlijn for a tip, I try OBS.


Philippe, the fair answer would be "the first app my Linux distro found for me" Smile The name is "vokoscreen" and it's very basic but works well. Then, I made all video cuts and titles in openshot (version 1), using also Inkscape for nicer titles.


Re: LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans - Milan Vančura - 2016-01-06

Milan Vančura Wrote:* support of buffer exchange and arrows editing: to be able to add and edit arrows in 3D model space - in a way LPub understands them so we can create instructions like this. More comfortable GUI than it is in MLCAD would be highly appreciated Smile (Maybe agree with LPub3D maintainer on a new syntax, too?)

Please, does anybody have an idea how GUI for this should look? Video not needed Smile but at least some ideas. I though about something like a feature of more parallel groups of hidden parts and a subwindow with a list of them and a chance to give them names (like "front wheels assembly" in the example above). But now, I feel this is not enough for all kinds of usage. Like, for example, modern Technic instructions putting some part to the temporary position in the model at first and move/rotate it to the final position several steps later.

What would be the best GUI to handle this in LDCad? (Second question is a cooperation with LPub but let's concentrate on the first one.)


Re: LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans - Roland Melkert - 2016-01-06

Philippe Hurbain Wrote:we can visually see that maximum length is exceeded, but nothing tells clearly that the part is too short?
(edit): Actually there is some visual clue: one end of the part (cable) looks folded on itself if target length is not reached.
This might be a bug, I'll have to check. It should show a thin white/blue line for the remaining unused space.

Philippe Hurbain Wrote:do the fields "part name" and "part description" do something already, or is it something planned for future release?
They are meant to be used to map the dynamic part to an official/virtual static LDraw part. This part will then be shown in the part lists instead of the shaped one. But this is not yet fully implemented as it kinda waits on the other part inventory features I initially planned for 1.4 or something, but delayed in favor of more 'interesting' features Smile


Re: LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans - Roland Melkert - 2016-01-06

Milan Vančura Wrote:Please, does anybody have an idea how GUI for this should look? Video not needed Smile but at least some ideas. I though about something like a feature of more parallel groups of hidden parts and a subwindow with a list of them and a chance to give them names (like "front wheels assembly" in the example above). But now, I feel this is not enough for all kinds of usage. Like, for example, modern Technic instructions putting some part to the temporary position in the model at first and move/rotate it to the final position several steps later.

What would be the best GUI to handle this in LDCad? (Second question is a cooperation with LPub but let's concentrate on the first one.)
I never used buffer exchange myself but as it has also been asked by email I have been looking into it. Inititally I thought it allowed for sections of code to be push/popped but it seems it always act on the entire subfile. So I probably could work with a bitmask on the to be rendered lines (giving 32 or 64 buffers) or something. GUI wise it's would propably work best combined with the source window.


Re: LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans - Merlijn Wissink - 2016-01-06

I don't think you need any special GUI for that. It's just more how the software handles it. In MLCad, all buffer exchanged parts are shown to the user in editor mode. When you use a lot of buffer exchange, the model becomes quite a mess with all kinds of random parts (and arrows) everywhere.

It would be much easier if the editor itself had support for buffer exchange. That it really only shows what you would see in the step you're working on. If you know what I mean, my explanation is maybe a bit vague...

Aside from that, the 'current' buffer exchange is somehwat limited. I've had some annoying experiences with it in the past because it works not very intuitive (although that might also have to do with MLCad, I can't work very well with MLCad) and it's missing some features I'd really like. But, I suppose this is not the place to develop a new syntax Wink


Re: LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans - Philippe Hurbain - 2016-01-06

Thanks, I'll give it a try!


Re: LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans - Milan Vančura - 2016-01-07

Roland Melkert Wrote:I never used buffer exchange myself but as it has also been asked by email I have been looking into it. Inititally I thought it allowed for sections of code to be push/popped but it seems it always act on the entire subfile. So I probably could work with a bitmask on the to be rendered lines (giving 32 or 64 buffers) or something. GUI wise it's would propably work best combined with the source window.
I'm not 100% sure I understand you. A very good explanation is at LPub tutorial page. Simply said, the "store" and "retrieve" pair of commands is used to forget everything between them and continue after retrieve with the model as it was in time of "save" command. Another example is in the tutorial I linked above.

How to make this comfortable and easy to understand in LDCad?
I do not want to see both new and replaced parts at the same time, in following steps. Neither I want to hide them manually, one by one. How to deal with all this automatically?
About arrows: do you think, Roland, it is possible to prepare an arrow editor?

Another question is: Is this syntax enough? - more details are in my answer to Merlijn's comment lower


Re: LDCad 1.6 suggestions/plans - Milan Vančura - 2016-01-07

Merlijn Wissink Wrote:Aside from that, the 'current' buffer exchange is somehwat limited. I've had some annoying experiences with it in the past because it works not very intuitive (although that might also have to do with MLCad, I can't work very well with MLCad) and it's missing some features I'd really like. But, I suppose this is not the place to develop a new syntax Wink
I hope it is Smile Or, better said, even this is too much for LDCad 1.6, we shall discuss this anyway, for future. It's the best time, I believe, because there is a maintainer of LPub again, after several years, so we have a partner for discussions.

Buffer exchange works for immediate replacements of everything from this step. But, sometimes, the situation is more complicated. Especially with Technic models instructions. Look at this example, steps 45-48. There is a submodel containing some (long) pins and a bendable front part, now straight. After this submodel is attached to the main model there is a step with arrows showing how to push those long pins, then another step showing pins in the new location and the front part of the (sub)model bent to the new angle and soft axles bent as well, connected with that front part.

This is near to impossible to create with bufferexchange commands because they are too "heavy" - they force you to replace everything or nothing, they can't work with parts of submodels in the main model etc. It's like an attempt to fix your watches with a jackhammer. I believe we need more subtle and precise commands.