Matt,

Nice work. My suggestion would be to use class variables (@@Matt_Model_Toolid, @@Matt_Model_Toolid2) or instance variables (@Matt_Model_Toolid, @Matt_Model_Toolid2) rather than global variables. Note that class variables must be declared right after the class is declared:

	class Matt_Observer < Sketchup;;ToolsObserver
		@@Matt_Model_Toolid = nil
		@@Matt_Model_Toolid2 = nil
		def onActiveToolChanged (tools_object, toolname, toolid)
			# ETC...

but instance variables can be delcared anywhere in the class methods.

Andrew,

It's an interesting idea, but I for one would be reluctant to let third parties edit my scripts (via a Wiki), which is essentially what you're proposing. A moderately clever person could introduce new code through the Wiki unless there was a parser that would filter out any ruby code, and then you would likely impede legitimate use of code snippets in commented sections.

It's not an impossible situation, but it would need some very serious attention to security.

As for SketchUp-oriented scripts, I'm not sure the collaborative comment editing is as important, but I'm certainly open to hearing from others about it.

Do you mean something like Curve Stitcher?

Thanks for the warning. While I won't be using the MacBook for intensive SketchUp work, it sounds like a real problem regardless of the application. I'll likely be investigating the third-party solutions when the time comes.

Yet another bridge to a C++ library... (sigh)

Well, I did add the vertical divisions as well, but if you ignore the vertical aspect, then that's what you have, unless I'm missing something.

I can modify it to do just the horizontal element, if you like. Can't add dimensions, though - not accessible to ruby.

Just a guess - try purging unused materials, and see if that fixes the problem. If so, then I have an easy fix.

Edson,

Thanks for the info and the link to the review. It was all very helpful.

@burkhard said:

If I run the script the groups and components explode all as expected but they do not regroup by materials. That's why I asked if it works in V7.

Strange. I tried it, and it grouped everything without a problem. Please try running the script while the the Ruby Console (Window>Ruby console) is open, and see if any error messages appear. If so, copy and paste them here and I will see what is happening.

Or if you can email me the model, I will look at it.

Thanks,

Hello all,

I need to replace a very old PC laptop. It is not my primary SketchUp machine (that's a desktop unit), but it does travel when we go on vacations, primarily for email and light office work.

We need not re-enter the old Mac vs. PC debate. I'm looking at getting the MacBook (not Pro) because I need a Mac platform for plugins development testing, and a PC just won't do that (obviously), and I'm on a budget.

I don't (think I) need a high-powered modeling platform on a laptop, just something that will do a good job with low- to average-sized models in SketchUp so I can test new plugins.

Has anyone had any experience with SketchUp on a non-Pro MacBook? Does it handle SU very well?

Does anyone have any experience with the "certified pre-owned" Macs (like from GainSaver.com)? Suggestions?

Does anyone in the US have a favorite online source for Macs? or do you use a local supplier?

Thanks,

@tomot said:

let me rephrase:

If you didn't make the first rectangle a group, would then any succeeding rectangles created by running the script again, intersect with any previously drawn rectangle.

Ah. Yes, if the geometry is not grouped, it should auto-break the edges at the intersections.

@depictureboy said:

It's a little different from what I was envisioning, and I am not sure if I will be able to use it how I was envisioning its use, but I am sure between me and DaveR we can apply it to our wood working designs...

I re-read your OP. What I got from it was you wanted a [dimension] line with 3 perpendicular lines at the GM proportions. If I understand that correctly, then the primary difference is that I included the vertical proportions as well.

If that's not what you intended, could you provide a visual mockup of what you were asking? That would help me get you the tool you need.

Interesting concept, and for creating Module names, it could work. However, locating files in subfolders by organization/author name conflicts with Organizer.rb.

Currently, Organzier allows users to create subfolders in the Plugins folder that then become submenus in the Plugins menu, with the scripts located in those subfolders likewise having menu items in the respective submenus. For example, you could create a "Draw-Create" subfolder, then move all scripts that draw or create geometry in that subfolder. In the Plugins menu, there would be a Draw-Create submenu, and each file in that subdirectory would be represented in the submenu. It's a fast way for users to clean up both their Plugins menu and Plugins folder at the same time, while grouping scripts by like function.

I think that a script that parses the new template file and can display the pertinent script information in a webDialog will go a long way towards helping users who want or need to know the author/contact information or version number to check for updates.

The offset problem comes down to the offset distance being exactly half a face's dimension. This creates a line rather than a face, and things go nuts at that point. Working on a fix for both sides of the issue.

@tomot said:

Fantastic!

I have 2 comments:

Why not include the 3 point pick triangle module which JIM helped me with, in Windowtools this idea provides an on screen reference showing the exact outline of the proposed 1st rectangle.

I'm puzzled why succeeding subdivisions within the same face using your script (aka Fabonacci), don't intersect with the model. I thought that was supposed to be one of the new features in SU7?

Thanks.

I intend to add features, but wanted to get something available.

The script creates a group with the grid inside it. You need to explode the group for the edges to interact with the model. Or did I misunderstand your issue?

@chris fullmer said:

Does he maybe have some code that is not wrapped in a module or something? Would that fix it?

Yes and yes.

@tomot said:

FYI: new SU7 install under Vista64, the only installed plugins are what the greeble script requires.

Do you mean that offset.rb is installed with SU7?

Sounds possible. I'll see what I can do.

@chris fullmer said:

Rick, I am getting this error:

Error; #<ArgumentError; Cannot create unit vector from zero length vector>
> C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/offset.rb;49;in `parallel?'
> C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/offset.rb;49;in `offset'
> C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/offset.rb;39;in `upto'
> C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/offset.rb;39;in `offset'
> C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/clf_greeble.rb;159;in `greeble'
> C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/clf_greeble.rb;137;in `each'
> C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/clf_greeble.rb;137;in `greeble'
> C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/clf_greeble.rb;200
> C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/clf_greeble.rb;200;in `call'

I'm sure its because I'm passing bad geometry to your offset script. What do I need to check so as to not pass bad geometry to offset.rb? Thanks!

Chris

Can you email me a sample .skp file that's causing the error?

Haha! Good point. But Google's backwards-compatibility policy is for 3 versions. By that time, there will be no more need for the "true" flag so it will cease to exist after version 9, and then I'm safe until SketchUp 70.0. At that point, my crystal ball gets a bit fuzzy.

But just in case I'm wrong, this is better:

Sketchup.version.split(".")[0].to_i<7