::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.

If the DLL does not have Ruby interfaces, then you will need to load and use it via the Ruby Fiddle library. http://ruby-doc.org/stdlib-2.0.0/libdoc/fiddle/rdoc/index.html http://ruby-doc.org/stdlib-2.0.0/libdoc/fiddle/rdoc/Fiddle.html

It's not currently possible. Only a layer's color - RGB - is changeable in Ruby. Sadly no Alpha [or Textures] are possible. One 'trick' is to make a SKP containing all of the Layers you want to use, each with manually assigned colors, and with transparencies and textures if desired. Remember to include a guide-point at the origin so it's usable later. Now in your Ruby code load that SKP as a component definition. If you do it inside a start_operation...commit block and use compdefn.entities.clear! then the loaded component is deleted but its imported layers remain - although later on they'll purge if unused. Now you can use these layers by name. Depending to what you want to do you can also rename an imported layer if desired...

Thank you very much for these complementary solutions. Renaud.

Thanks TIG!

"Some_Dict_Name" needs to be "Medeek_SomePluginName" at a minimum, and can be expanded even more, like: "Medeek_SomePluginName_Purpose" if "SomePluginName" will have more than one dictionary, each used for different purposes. Or you can nest dictionaries inside another dictionary. So you can have one toplevel company dictionary for all your plugins, called "Medeek" (or whatever) and create child dictionaries for whatever plugins that need them. Those child dictionaries could have grandchild dictionaries. But it is most important to know that you must separate your dictionaries from those of other authors. (It is up to you how to separate your various plugin dictionaries.)

@picpic020960 said: how to for write data to excel from ruby ? Try something simple like: def set_value(row,col,val) # @xl.activesheet.cells(row,col).value = val # end ### set_value() @picpic020960 said: other question : [Do you know if there] exists 'macro' recorder as in Excel ? Whatever exists in Excel, and has a built-in VisualBasic interface, can be accessed via WIN32OLE (from Ruby.) So, refer to the VisualBasic object model for Excel: MSDN: Object model (Excel VBA reference)

So to recap my understanding. You hope[d] to somehow edit a copy of your main RB file, and from that make individually customized scrambled RBS files. This is actually possible. But your RBS files, put within your distributed RBZ archive cannot be 'signed' for use in >=v2016 [all loading-policies]... unless you actually submit each one of the RBZ files separately and on receipt then send it to your individual user. Here's an idea... RBZ contents as follows... MyLovelyTool.rb == the 'loader' MyLovelyTool == the subfolder containing... MyLovelyTool_main_code.rb == compiled by the signing process to RBS or RBE if limited to >=v2016 MyLovelyTool.hash == the signed file referencing all .rb/rbs/rbe/js.htm.html.css files in the RBZ AND MyLovelyTool_user_data.rbs == which you make from an RB on a per user basis - containing the individual details you want... It contains the same module/class set up as the main_code and simply sets the @@a or whatever. The main_code uses Sketchup;;require('MyLovely_user_data') as it initially loads, so that the customized details are used... This way the main IP relevant main)code can be RBS or RBE and incorporated in the signing hash, and the user_data can be somewhat obfuscated in your own RBS which is added to the signed RBZ later on... It will still be loaded by the signed file, while containing individual details. Be aware that RBS made by your old scrambler exe is readily crack-able, but probably sufficient obfuscation in your case - certainly better than a plain RB - which'd be easily editable. You can't make a securely encrypted RBE version without going through the signing/encryption process via the web-site. You could have course make mock RBZs for each user with a matching MyLovelyTool_user_data subfolder and submit those for signing/RBEing, then use just the RBE... adding it to the main RBZ before giving it to the user... BUT this route seems too much effort for little benefit... There must be an easier way to do this !

@arne2320 said: Hey guys I am currently trying to make a hole inside an entity with the ruby api, but can't find the rigth way to do it, I have tried it by creating a circle, placing it on top of the entity and then removing it but this doesn't seem to work so does anybody have an idea how i can do this? Thanks in advance When you place the circle on a face, it will create a new face inside the circle. If you remove the circle you remove this new face as well. So place the circle and remove the face inside instead of the circle. [image: eY4V_Hole.gif]