Why no chain adge option in surface 4 edges?


surface from 2,3 or 4 edge curves tool.

If I have two edge curves that are required separate for surfacing the side of an object, but required joined so as to surface the front of an object, why is there no option to chain edges, i.e. for each edge it says chain edges yes or no,
so to do front of object
first edge , choose no, pick edge, hit enter
next edge choose yes, then pick the two edges, hit enter (it ses them as one edge)
next edge choose no, pick edge, hit enter.

if it sees a chance to surface then it surfaces.

I wouldnt mind an option to tell it when I want it to commit the surface, no doubt if 3 is enough, or even 2, it will surface, as it currently does.


Hmmm - this is a command that really wants things to stay simple… unlike Sweep2, or NetworkSrf it does not have any provision for refitting input curves or cooking up anything new behind the scenes - it uses the input curve structure to create the surface… The best way to use this command is to give it matching curves on opposite sides. Use Sweep2, probably, for what you are doing, or NetworkSrf.


Rhino provides an interesting conundrum here.

Historically, Rhino started with pretty simple and (shall we say) dumb commands, and some of them are left over. Over time, other more sophisticated commands were added to do conceptually related things with much more flexibility. Today, there these commands sit, side by side, doing related things with unrelated interfaces. For a user that grew up with Rhino: no problem (well, maybe some minor annoyance). For new users: major frustration, confusion and annoyance. Either the new user thoroughly reads and memorizes all available manuals, tutorials, etc to get up to speed (one of these days someone might actually do this), or they gradually modify their initial expectations for Rhino as software with a consistent, intuitive, easy to use UI. Hopefully in most cases this will occur before they give up on Rhino and smash their computer into smithereens.

It would be nice if some reasonable amount of time was devoted in the development process to reflecting on these inconsistencies between commands and modernizing the old weaker ones to fit better with the mental model used in the newer ones.

Is this a reasonable analysis?