Hi Dan, Thanks for a pretty amazing exploration of the possibilities. It's both educational and entertaining (for those of us who like this kind of thing). My apologies for dropping the ball on getting back to you. This is one of those projects that I just keep whittling away at because each step seems a little more complex than I had expected or was ready to deal with. You provided quite an array of methods for finding the starting angle of a circle, and I'm sure some of those will be useful as I move forward. As for my current stuck spot, I think what I'm really trying to figure out is how to specify the starting angle of a circle, a polygon, or a curve, relative to the previously placed circle or polygon, as I go around the knot placing circles. When I use the usual tools to create a circle, the starting angle does not seem to be a parameter that is under my control. The image at the top of this thread shows where it defaults to, just using the standard circle-creating functions. I do not need to understand the logic behind those defaults, because that's not going to help me with my actual problem. If I create a polygon, like a circle, I also do not know how to specify a starting angle. I have to wonder, when you draw a circle or a polygon manually in SU, the point you drag out from the center becomes the starting angle. So what's going on under the hood? Is a default circle being generated and then rotated so that it's starting angle is where the cursor is? Lacking that methodology, the only way I can see to create either a circle or a polygon where I get to specify the staring angle is to make a 360 degree curve. That feels unnecessarily limiting, but that's where I've gotten to. My current thinking on my original problem is that I need to figure out how to place the new curve, based on the information I have from the previous circle/curve. I have the normal, which is derived from the current segment of the knot curve. I have the previous circle/curve. And I have the previous circle/curve's starting angle. And, as you suggested, I have to deal with what the starting angle is relative to. I have to figure out what starting angle I want to specify, based on the previous normal, the previous starting angle, and the current normal. I think I'm going to have to nudge the starting angle of the next successive circle by just a little, so that as the sequence progresses around the knot, it does a slow rotation and comes back to the beginning. Does it want to go around only once? Or three times for the three lobes of this knot? Or what? You gave me a great nudge that percolated for a while and now I think I know what I need to figure out for my next step. I hope that's not another year, but who knows? Anyway, thanks for all the tips. August

Here is my solution selectionObjectTemp = Sketchup.active_model.selection.to_a if selectionObjectTemp.length == 0 selectionTemp = nil else selectionTemp = selectionObjectTemp end if @definitions[definitionAImporter] definition = @definitions[definitionAImporter] else composantPath = File.join(@libPath,"#{definitionAImporter}.skp") if File.exist?(composantPath) definition = @definitions.load composantPath else UI.messagebox "le chemin n'existe pas; #{composantPath}" end end if selectionTemp != nil selectionTemp.each{|entitie| if entitie.is_a? Sketchup;;ComponentInstance entitie.definition = definition end } end

Echoing my response here from the other thread: Not sure about the intellisense. Unsure how Sublime handle that. As for the debugger, I think it should work if you can find a package that let you set up remote debugging.

You have started another thread and I've replied there. I know you do not want to trigger it depending on a selection - I just used that as an example... In the example you show the other buttons are not disabled. When one is active it's shown 'depressed', when another is click that takes the focus and appears depressed. It the other buttons were actually 'disabled', then they would not be clickable and you'd never get out of the first clicked button's state !

If you want an example on how to set up the debugger in RubyMine you can check out this thread: http://forums.sketchup.com/t/please-help-me-to-setup-de-debugger-on-rubymine-for-mac/289/2?u=thomthom

We've checked it out. This is old hat really. We still have to trace off the geometry to form editable Revit families. Here's the solution to the problem of SketchUp to Revit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQJFxCTey5E

I see this thread is almost ten years old, but has this issue ever actually gotten fixed?

You need an API for UVUnwrapping then... hm... Maybe something WrapR might consider? (pinging Rich)

::sleepily opens one eye:: hmmmmm?... this sounds like someone is dabbling with scary things...

@exmole said: I see this was posted 10 months ago. Did you ever figure it out? I have the same issue. Unfortunetly, not yet. Will try to get someone at Trimble to look at it.

Sorry for the delayed response. It looks fine, thanks again! [image: TtoBovE.png]

Unless you're still using SketchUp 7 or 8, you don't need this; and even if your are, you still probably don't need it. What problem do you wish to solve by running this code?

Unfortunately even with your adjustment, the code does not work yet. When I launch SketchUp, nothing happens. And the "Ruby console" shipments this error message : @unknownuser said: Error: # <TypeError: no implicit conversion of nil into String> Or is the error? See you soon. David

HE SHOOTS HE SCORES! That fixed it - thanks so much!

And Yep with your code that works like a charm! The mystery is why that works for you and Solo for the original and not for me! Have you a secret resizing? [image: BxlF_sdm_measures.jpg]

I have some experience using SketchUp & Unreal, not Unity. It could be some sort of collision setting (use the actual mesh of the stairs for collision instead of its boundingbox - this is what I have to manually do in Unreal for stairs) OR increasing some step setting allowing the user to 'climb'. Simple google search results in: http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/how-to-get-a-rigidbody-player-to-walk-on-any-type-of-stairs.133573/ https://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/class-CharacterController.html

This method only works when format is set to decimal (or engineering which is also decimal) in the model info. If fractional or architectural are used '1.2.to_l.to_s" returns '~ 1 1/4"' without any decimal separator.

@dan rathbun said: I believe this was implemented in a cross-tab of checkboxes by Martin Rinehart. Thanks a lot! I had a feeling that I've seen it somewhere already; apparently I just can't google the desired result .)

Groups are implemented as a special case of Components. They add some convenience methods that expose some aspects of the associated ComponentDefinition, and also a "lazy uniqueness" mechanism. By that I mean that when you copy a Group, it behaves just like a Component does - another instance is added to the ComponentDefinition. Only when you perform some action on that requires it to be unique does SketchUp clone a second ComponentDefinition and wire the Group to it (same thing as the make_unique method does). Any other copies remain associated with the original ComponentDefinition until you also alter them. For Group copies, it is a one-at-a-time thing.

If you are using the Ruby API, Geom::Transformation.translation followed by Geom::Transformation.rotation.