Thanks, the link you provided is straightforward.

Possibly. Maybe it was in another language where you had to gray and disable. ...Visual Basic...? Can't think of anything else where I've dealt with menus...

If you want worldspace near and far plane distances, just project the Model bounding box onto the lookat vector lookat = Sketchup.active_model.active_view.camera.target - Sketchup.active_model.active_view.camera.eye then project each corner of the model bounding box on this line. So: for i in 0...8 #enumerate all the corners x = i & 1 != 0 ? Sketchup.active_model.bounds.min[0] : Sketchup.active_model.bounds.max[0] y = i & 2 != 0 ? Sketchup.active_model.bounds.min[1] : Sketchup.active_model.bounds.max[1] z = i & 4 != 0 ? Sketchup.active_model.bounds.min[2] : Sketchup.active_model.bounds.max[2] build a corner point to test c = Geom::Point3d.new(x,y,z) how far a long the line of sight it is d = lookat.dot(c - Sketchup.active_model.active_view.camera.eye) track minimum and maximum value of d end

Is it a known bug that Sketchup.active_model.options["SlideshowOptions"]["LoopSlideshow"] appears to be totally ignored by SketchUp? I've checked back to SU6 and it is read/writable but the animation still loops if its set to false

well, that was easy... cheers!

You can also find TIG's update of the Delaunay ruby here -- though I don't think the changes have anything to do with the math: http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=323&t=34232 Best, Jason.

See my first post - I already reported.

@pout said: Why don't you just send the data through JSON to a htmlpage and use that combined with existing chart creator? Like this one: http://www.anychart.com/products/anychart/overview/ Should be pretty simple. Are you in the correct topic, Pout? AnyChart does not produce diagrams, it produces charts. And yes it's a minimum of 500 dollars "simple". Jim had some success using GraphViz, which actually has two examples of state diagrams: finite state machine* LR(0) state graph

Faster solution, using hashes for quick lookups: ` === Find Curves === Sorting: 0.306s (11%) Filter: 0.05s Method: TT_Find_Curves Found 4253 curves in 2.62s` Revision 2

Perhaps what makes problem is the word "snippet".

Wowsers, thanks for all the responses. Question answered!

@unknownuser said: hmm im somewhat confuses here-why did the face appear to have been shifted to the origin of g1 - instead of preserving it's original position? I think that there is a problem somehow with the transformation of the objects. Following my instructions in the other post: http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=180&t=31443&p=276973&hilit=kwalkerman#p276860 the end result is that in the outliner, a group is added to Sketchup.active_model.entities. The transformation of the group is equal to the transformation of the original face in it's original group. Then, when you open the original group for editing, the face appears in its original location. So, there are two major problems: when passing entities into entities.add_group, entities MUST equal model.active_entities the entities passed in retain their original transformation, relative to the previous entities collection, with some strange behavior. -- Karen

It was just a pseudo code of how the puts behave in SU.

@thomthom said: Look at model.options http://code.google.com/apis/sketchup/docs/ourdoc/model.html#options OptionsProvider http://code.google.com/apis/sketchup/docs/ourdoc/optionsprovider.html OptionsManager http://code.google.com/apis/sketchup/docs/ourdoc/optionsmanager.html Remember to use the keys to access the options as indexes vary from version to version. To print out all available options for a given version, use this on-liner: <span class="syntaxdefault"><br />Sketchup</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">.</span><span class="syntaxdefault">active_model</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">.</span><span class="syntaxdefault">options</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">.</span><span class="syntaxdefault">keys</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">.</span><span class="syntaxdefault">each </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">{|</span><span class="syntaxdefault">key</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">|</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> p key</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">;</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> Sketchup</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">.</span><span class="syntaxdefault">active_model</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">.</span><span class="syntaxdefault">options</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">[</span><span class="syntaxdefault">key</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">].</span><span class="syntaxdefault">each </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">{|</span><span class="syntaxdefault">k</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">,</span><span class="syntaxdefault">v</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">|</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> puts </span><span class="syntaxstring">"> #{k} - #{v}"</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">}</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">}<br /></span><span class="syntaxdefault"> </span> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. it worked

@shirazbj said: Instead of writing every 'mm' in code, I thought it's more easy to draw as it is and scale back at the end. That also cleared me from inserting a DWG file, need scale back to get the dimensions show in right number. Thanks. An imported DWG will use whatever units it has set in the import 'options' dialog opened from the main DWG import browser, So you can rely on that to always be correct.

@unknownuser said: Now I get it! thanks- i had no idea sketchup used the old version So it seems this was the only thing that bothered you. Good.

Thanks Didier! These examples are good for learning. Regards, Siegfried

@tig said: I'm not clear about how a good or bad entry for 'value >>> v' might actually 'look' in your code... <span class="syntaxdefault">new_value </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">=</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">[]<br /></span><span class="syntaxdefault">            value</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">.</span><span class="syntaxdefault">each do</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">|</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> v </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">|<br /></span><span class="syntaxdefault">                if </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">!</span><span class="syntaxdefault">v</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">.</span><span class="syntaxdefault">is_a</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">?(Array)<br /></span><span class="syntaxdefault">                    v </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">=</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">[[</span><span class="syntaxdefault">1</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">,</span><span class="syntaxdefault">0</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">,</span><span class="syntaxdefault">0</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">],</span><span class="syntaxdefault">0</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">]<br /></span><span class="syntaxdefault">                end<br />                v </span><span class="syntaxkeyword"><<</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> time </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">*</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> a<br />                a </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">+=</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> 1<br />                new_value </span><span class="syntaxkeyword"><<</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> v<br />            end<br />            keyframes</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">[</span><span class="syntaxdefault">key</span><span class="syntaxkeyword">]</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> </span><span class="syntaxkeyword">=</span><span class="syntaxdefault"> new_value</span> I did it like this in the end as both types of v have time added. Anyway it works which is good! Thanks again. The empty elements currently are needed to delay certain rotations - like a kick at the end of a run. I have a mechanism to modularise the animation. I want to leave that until later.

BTW... the script should make a temp hash with layer names as the keys and visibility as the values. This should store the visible state of layers before rendering starts. .. do your thing ... .. then restore the visibilty state for all layers at the end.

Hi Scott, the question you have is a bit different than the one being discussed here. You might just start a new topic asking the whole group your question - which seems to be specifically "How do I make a wing surface from a list of 3d points" or something along those lines. Your question is a bit burried here in this topic, and you will probably get more eyes seeing your dilema if you just made your own topic. Do you have any programming experience? Not that it matters, you can always learn, I just thought I'd ask.