Blend surface whit history incorrect

Blend surface with activated history. “Flat sections” option activated.
By moving the upper surface, even a little, for example, the blend surface becomes open, unfold.
I think this is a bug to fix…
blend surface incorrect.3dm (237.5 KB)


No reply? I think it’s important to fix this flaw before the final version goes out …

The first commercial version will go out with quite a number of non-critical bugs still in. “Critical” is defined loosely as bugs that can cause crashes, lose data, or cause other major problems; having incorrect geometric results does not necessarily qualify as a “stop-ship” bug.

There will be quite a few corrections that will arrive with 6.1. There is never a “Final” version of a Rhino release until the last SR is out - there were 14 of them in V5.

–Mitch

All right, Mitch, I understand. Rhino never stops updating …
I thought that, because it is a geometric defect, this should be corrected before other minor bugs, but I’m wrong…

Nevertheless, someone (like yourself) familiar with using the you-track system should probably either add this example to an existing item, or create a new one. It seems serious enough to need some early attention and might be symptomatic of a basic flaw in blend surface and/or history…

At the moment, the main priority is to look for system crashes and eliminate them, as far as possible, as Mitch says. After these aspects, the defects to the most important commands, such as the “blend srf”, in fact, should be the second priority: a command to generate surfaces must work best; as well as a command to create continuity between surfaces.
Definitely will be adjusted later, perhaps in the first service release of Rhino 6 (i hope).

Almost everytime I open V6, I can find bugs.
What is important is based on personal reference. But…

I don’t think V6 is ready.

Make2D? tragedy.
Cycles? Hmmm…
SUB-D? OK, understandable. Let’s hope for V7
Interface? Old-fashioned. (I personally don’t really care though)
Surface modeling? Like a pipe dream.

Overall, I felt that the development has lost its focus. It’s messy and undone.
I’m a big fan of Rhinoceros. I wished the robust growth and improvement, but…

I felt tired first…

1 Like

Which surface/solid modeling software has a better/modern interface in your opinion; do you have some favourites you could share and say briefly why that is so?

“Interface” might be a wrong word. I think a better way to describe is the comfort level of user experience which includes text, icon, and navigation system…

Considering everyone has different taste, I like MOI’s except the part that it doesn’t have command line.
Looks like from this person’s YT channel WE can discover more…

I tried MOI for days. You can feel the difference…

Other softwares from AD, I excluded here. There’s no point to compare one by one…

Thanks for your opinion.

Moi3D looks quite good. My background is Catia/Alias based, with Rhino in the mix since a year now as well. Personally, I like Alias’ “marking menus” most, because one can work on a screen with nothing but a large perspective window, with no pallettes, windows or icon bars at all. Then again, parametric software like SolidWorks has a lot going for it, in terms of feature tree display and the level of technical control.

The good thing is that there are now so very many 3D softwares out there so that everyone can find one that suits their work-style and client-base.

1 Like

Can’t agree more… I don’t know when it could be real in Rhino…

1 Like

Well, I was just being lazy and waiting for someone else to do it… :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

I added to this item, as it may be related, at least it’s an issue with BlendSrf and History.