Would anybody prefer if the Match > point on surface edge could still be altered when the dialog box is open? Similar to inside of BlendCrv/BlendSrf?
On another note - has there ever been an option when using a surface edge as input for Match, that the matched curve can be made? Currently, the match command will preview the result; but not produce anything. Maybe this could then be similar to Extend - where surface edge input for a curve to extend, creates the edge curve with extension.
That bit is a bug… thanks for the report.
https://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-54404
As for the UI…
https://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-2524 <<<< Woah, low number!!
https://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-32337
-Pascal
Cool - glad I noticed. Yeah, I thought I had seen it work in the past - was it okay in v5?
Will the other two YT items be made public?
Jonathan
Hello - the first one is now public.
-Pascal
@Jonathan_Hutchinson1 - just fyi, in case it is helpful, a thing I’ve been monkeying with along these lines - currently only for position & tangency but with some possibly useful and possibly dumb feedback and interaction…
To use the Python script use RunPythonScript, or a macro:
_-RunPythonScript "Full path to py file inside double-quotes"
-Pascal
Oh, my lord. I was just about to figure out where to post something along the lines of “why doesn’t match curve have the match to closest points like the match surface does”…
The inconsistencies between the various match tools, fillet tools and blend tools is currently one of the worst UI messes I think I’ve seen in a professional application in a very long time.
You work for McNeel. You write wonderful scripts with great functionality users seem to be asking for. Why don’t they officially become integrated into Rhino?
@eobet, @Jonathan_Hutchinson1 - just fyi, I updated the script - it’s getting a little unwieldy but I think it works…
changes:
Matching for Perpendicular uses the curve frame plane for free curves, the surface frame for edges - i.e. the result will be tangent to the surface and perp to the edge.
Splitting the target curve now works on edges - if Split=Yes, then the edge curve is duplicated and split (the edge is not split - that might be possible but does not seem like a good idea to me.)
Feedback changes when SplitTargetCurve=Yes vs Split SplitTargetCurve=No so you can tell if splitting will occur without looking at the command line.
Added curvature graph.
As for your question… I do not know - I am fussing with this because a) it might be useful, b) it is interesting to try stuff and see how users like it, and c) in general I think we can and should provide more useful interaction and feedback and I’m using this and one or two other little projects to crudely prototype some ideas that, hopefully, will bear some fruit in the real commands…
-Pascal
Dear Pascal,
Thank you for looking into this already. I see the curve creation from matching a surface edge has some ticks/solves on the YT# already. Is the fix likely to be integrated into a new WIP/SR?
@eobet n regards to complaining about the clunkiness, yeah I understand the frustration. It’s like rhino had this heyday with T Splines/VSR which was a golden time (before my time, and outside of budget, I should add). Resources are going into subdiv to catch up (which I totally get, if it’s the market direction then that needs attention paid to it). Likewise, the growing sector of architecture/construction has less need for these type of matching/tune-up tools, so it feels like there’s limited request/airtime for improving this area.
I agree - there is some of overlap, and could be more, between blending and matching (hint: edge direction alignment in blendsrf ala matchsrf,or perhaps that’s too much overlap). The bug I pointed out, for example, is a workaround which means I can match opposite edges perpendicular to another surface edge with different directions - whereas with MatchSrf, preserve/auto/match/perp means you’re tied to changing both opposing end directions. All I can say is… I certainly wouldn’t know how these tools can be better from a capability point of view! I can only comment anecdotally.
Jonathan
@eobet, @Jonathan_Hutchinson1, Y’all, I’m probably about done for now with this thing , for now., unless you tell me there is something horrible, so I plug-inated it for convenience, in case it is actually useful.
MatchOnCurve.rhp (28.5 KB)
Unblock the plug-in on your machine and then drag and drop onto Rhino (6/7WIP).
https://wiki.mcneel.com/rhino/unblockplugin
-Pascal
