I haven't had a chance to look at the debugger yet but the first thing I thought when I read about was, is this a backdoor that can be used to defeat the .rbs encrypted rubies? Does the debugger reveal anything about the current line of execution, or does it just deliver line numbers? When displaying data about a variable, does it volunteer variable names or does it just respond with a value?

I would be very disappointed to find out it did.

Thanks! Look forward to that day (I hate COM).

Just to make sure I haven't missed anything, the SLAPI can't be used to access the model data in an active SketchUp session the way the old COM API can, correct? Still just file read and write? (I know the preferred route is Ruby, of course, but the COM API is magnitudes faster)

(Sorry to butt in on your thread tomasz )

@tig said:

however, those that are made as proper 'Extensions' offer the user the ability to switch the tools on and off via Preferences...

But this isn't new, right? This has been available for a long time...

@jbacus said:

Further, there are new hooks in the API that allow folks who want to build more customized "Plugin Managers" the things they'll need to do so.

Are these new "hooks" published somewhere? Have the API docs been updated?

The release docs list the zip stuff separately from the "API hooks". And the zip integration wouldn't be have anything to do with the API anyway. I think they must be talking about something different, at least it certainly sounds like it to me.

The release notes for M2 state this:

@unknownuser said:

"Ruby plugin hooks: In addition to the above functionality, we have added several API hooks to allow Developers to more easily write their own Ruby extension managers."

I haven't been able to find any info about this on the sketchup blogs, here at sketchucation, the API docs, or anywhere. Does anyone know what this new functionality is?

Maybe the view just isn't refreshing on each iteration? Try adding a view.invalidate of view.refresh before each sleep.

A 64 GB solid-state harddrive? That's cool!

Straight KT, no post-pro. Kind of looks like a spider-man comic.

I'm having a hard time creating a beveled edge that doesn't completely destroy the model...
I don't have progression screen shots, but I started with a rectangle and used intersect to shape it. I used intersect to create an outline for the buttons too, so they follow the body contour (but made it a lot more work!)

I know the scale and body shape is off... I just eyeballed it.

That was fun! Thanks solo!!

For the grater, I started with a cone, cut the top off, then segmented it twice and manually pinched it in using scale. Lower poly, but... No rubies used.

Can certain percent of the work be done outside SU (I'm thinking at least UV mapping)?

I started with the Twilight SSS template (Wax I think), then I made some extra changes in KT to produce this material. I was really surprised how it turned out; I really like it.

@unknownuser said:

Twilight User
Here's my problem - ...

The red rubber dragon I posted above was done in Twilight. I just used the SSS Rubber Ball right out of the box. It's done with Interior +, so that's probably the difference.

This is Twilight also.

Red rubber ball

I know that classes that are created using ruby "C" extensions have the class's 'initialize' method called when a new instance of that class is created (using class.new). I don't know if this follows for classes defined strictly in ruby, but I would assume so. Why your method was called by other rubies, I have no idea, unless it was somehow interpreting your initialize as the initialize for those other classes.

Oops sorry. Meant to tack that on.

dot product = 1 means parallel and in the same direction
dot product = -1 means parallel and in the opposite direction.

So if direction matters, look for closest to 1. If it doesn't, use the absolute value.

take the dot product of each vector, normalized, with the vector you are comparing against, normalized.

how_close = vector_a.normalize().dot( comparison_axis )
how_close_b = vector_b.normalize().dot( comparison_axis )

the normalize is important because they all need to be the same length for this kind of comparison.

Have you tried the Transformation.axes method? It sounds like you should be able to "remap" the standard axes using this transform. Something like Transformation.axes(ORIGIN, X_AXES, Z_AXES, Y_AXES). Just a thought, I have no idea if it will work.