I like that too Martin, thanks! Good to see you around the forums again, Chris

Nope, that is not possible in SU at this point, and I've never heard of any plan to implement it. Chris

Thanks for good explanation. I see, I told not clearly, to type the only one script line in the ruby console.

Hi Laura, Applying a transformation to geometry is available for groups and components. If your user rectangle is not a group or component, you'll have to retrieve what the user did exactly (translation, rotation) with its rectangle. That's not simple IMHO. If at first you make a group with the rectangle, then let the user translate/rotate it, it's really easy to draw openings in the rectangle because you can retrieve the group transformation and then draw your openings at origin and then apply the transformation to them, or each time you calculate a point of an opening boundary, apply the transformation to it: # Create the group; group=Sketchup.active_model.entities.add_group() # Draw the user rectangle here and let him translate/rotate it ... # get the group transformation; trans=group.transformation # Apply the transformation to a point of an opening; point.transform!(trans) # Explode the group if neede at the end of the draw; group.explode Hope this helps,

Yes, this is very simple. You can probably do it more complicated, like doing any number of sections on any 3d shape and the division of each section at the same time, choosing the degrees, etc. Or may be pie charts from xml or tabulated text document...

Thanks all. I need to rethink this before asking people to venture further down a blind alley. I can reduce a Sketchup up model to two plain text lists. One lists components and groups and the other lists scenes. Both lists are turned into javascript multi-level arrays. But I don't want to wipe out any established relationships between components and layers, layers and scenes, scenes and styles and scenes and property settings. I thought I could do that by manipulating the model but I am thinking it is probably better to capture the data and regenerate the whole thing. If you are interested in why I want to do this please see the discussion in the Modelur thread. Thanks and regards Chris

thanks for the quick replies. after reading the articles, I tried to use a selection observer, but there seems to be some "gotchas" with it. for example, if you manually select something, it won't trigger the "onSelectionAdd" event, but if it is automatically selected, then it will. any ideas?

@unknownuser said: take a look at http://www.rubyinside.com/how-to-create-a-ruby-extension-in-c-in-under-5-minutes-100.html I am on completely unknown territory and have stopped on the 'make' command. I presume it is the command responsible for compiling the C code with the makefile created in a previous step. I would like to recreate the MyTest in VC++ 2008 Express Edition... and I am lost. I will dig through internet to understand the whole process, but if someone can explain me in few words how to compile the example with VC++2008 will be thankful. Tomasz

Though, for these border cases, I have found that restarting SU help. Probably frees up a little extra memory. And some times I have more luck by exporting to BMP. I assume BMP works better because it's uncompressed so less processing is required.

I might have to reconsider my latest version of Selections Toys that add Select Deselect menu items for each layer in the model... Or at least put a cap limit to it for those models that contains an obscene amount of layers.

@whaat said: Have you released the code yet? I thought I did, but I guess I haven't. I will review it and let you know where it is. @thomthom said: I don't find the UI.input class to be that user friendly. It doesn't scale well when you start adding more elements. @whaat said: One of my goals is to make the interface as similar as possible to the existing UI.inputbox class, thus increasing the liklihood that it will be used. Simplicity of use by the script-writer was my primary goal for creating my inputbox class - I could never remember how to construct a dropdown. So I made a single method to add a prompt - named 'add'. Then inputbox creates the appropriate type of input based on the arguments given. Have a look at the example code on the inputbox page. it shows how it turns an Array into a dropdown automatically, amongst other features.

@jim said: Hi Martin, You don't need to re-install - I'm sure this is just a configuration issue. First, IRB and sketchup.rb do not mix. Stupid me! That was the whole problem. Thanks!

@e-anima said: Is it only working if i select all faces (without edges) ? It only transfer the material of the selected faces. (Doesn't matter if you select edges, they are ignored.) @e-anima said: Where did you get the output ? Where? The Backside of the faces will look like the Frontside.

Thanks Chris! Forgot all about the parent class idea. Still wrapping my head around this object-oriented approach.

Thanks for the suggestions and links everyone. I'll try them out when I have more time. Kenny

not much you can do apart from the angle parameter - try scaling the contours way up otherwise extrude the contours into faces (using didier's projections), then use fredo's round corner to smooth, bevel the angles.. then get rid of the face and should be left with the contour hope that makes sense (EDIT: just realised that would only round the corners but not simplify - you should use fredo's beziertools and convert the contour into a polyline (you may need to use weld.rb before conversion) , then you can change how many segments it is made of)

@remus said: massmaterialimporter It's unlikely to scale the textures correctly, though. p.s. You can find plugins very easily using the extensions index: http://www.sketchucation.com/extensions-index/ , a serach for 'material' brought up the above script in the first 10 results many thanks to remus

Hi, Nice plugin. It reminds me my vr_obj_exporter back in 2006, that I was too lazy to update since then...

@chris fullmer said: Thats neato. Looks like the kind of thing we should develop an entire system of architecture around. i am glad it was a joke. there is way too much of that already.