- Status Assigned
- Percent Complete
- Task Type Feature Request
- Category QCAD (main)
-
Assigned To
Andrew - Operating System All
- Severity Low
- Priority Very Low
- Reported Version 3.29.4
- Due in Version Undecided
-
Due Date
Undecided
- Votes
- Private
FS#2537 - More variants for converting element types could be useful.
I don’t actually have any use for this idea currently, but am just posting it here to document it for consideration.
Basically, it occurred to me at least a few more useful conversions between shapes besides the existing ones could be useful.
For example:
- Converting lines into axially aligned rectangles of a specified “radius” or “diameter” (with an option to delete or keep the original line geometry).
- An option for the above (lines –> rectangles) that causes the intersections between the resulting rectangles to be automatically removed, like a kind of “automatic/magic wall creation tool” based on laying down lines instead of rectangles and then converting via this tool.
- Converting circles/ellipses and rectangles back and forth between each other via their bounding volumes. It seems reasonably likely that people will sometimes want to convert circular design elements into rectangular ones and vice versa (e.g. deciding a rectangular column makes more sense than a cylindrical one and vice versa).
- Converting any arbitrary selection into a corresponding bounding circle (not rectangle, which already exists) of sufficient size to enclose all points in the selection.
Basically, QCAD already has tools for converting shapes with operations that are a natural fit for the existing geometry, but has less tools for converting to entirely different geometry, but such uses could actually still be very useful potentially!
It seems likely to be common enough as a use case to merit inclusion, rather than just using scripting.
I don’t have any pressing need for these and I know that I could script them to create them if I really wanted to.
These are relatively minor ideas. I’m just putting this out here as more ideas for making this already wonderful software even better. :)
Please restrict each feature request to one singular outlined request.
Provide examples, preferably in a drawing file with before and after.
Between the lines I read that you want to merge shapes.
QCAD has no concept of an enclosed area.
There is nothing like a Union, a Subtraction or an Intersection of areas.
At best it handles open and closed contours, the outline of things.
At best it can hatch a selection of such closed boundaries.
But a Hatch is not a surface, it is adding a pattern within a boundary.
The pattern is in fact a collection of cropped endless lines in a dedicated linetype.
A pattern may consist of several of such parallel cloned lines in various orientations.
A rectangular or cylindrical column is a 3D object.
The area of a circle is an adaptive property, area relates to radius.
But this is not adaptive for a quadrilateral.
There is no unique parametric ruling on how to expand/contract sides to match the area.
The last tool request in the list is probably a bounding circle instead of a bounding box.
An RBox is already supported mathematically.
From a flatten RBox to a 2D polyline or 4 lines is a small step.
Hence Misc .. Draw .. Draw bounding box
Provide in an example of things and I'll write you a simple script that can be run using XC.
Regards,
CVH
Oh, I have no need for any of these features as the present time. Don't trouble yourself with it. Thanks for the offer though! :)
I was just dropping of this suggestion when it occurred to me so that it could be looked over later on by Andrew and anyone else who is digging for ideas.
I remember that you said that QCAD has no concept of enclosed area and I get the point from working with it some. Much of what I said doesn't require a concept of a closed area I think though.
By rectangular or cylindrical column I meant one represented from an orthogonal (non-isometric) side-view as a rectangle or circle. I wasn't talking about a 3D object. I just gave that as a contextual example for motivation.
For columns we are not on the same level ... Missing a visual example.
The side-view of a vertical rectangular column is a rectangle.
That of a vertical cylindrical column is also a rectangle.
Or are we talking of the unfolding of a rectangular or cylindrical column?
I do that per spreadsheet with DrawFromCSV, not limited to 'columns'.
Regards,
CVH
I was talking about a top-down view, like what an architect would use on a floor plan blueprint. I'm aware that they both look like "rectangles" when seen from side views.
I'm not sure what you mean by an "unfolding" of a column. Does that mean a cut out of a corner of one drawn in isometric perspective? Or perhaps rolled out like a sheet in some way? Maybe that's what the cylindrical projection thing is for?
Anyway though, no worries. Have a good day/night.