[Bf-funboard] No Torus and some ideas (Snapping feature)

[Martin Poirier]

--- Patrik Andersson <patrik at linet.se> wrote:

> > There's no bug there. To do what you defined as
> the
> > "correct" behavior, there would need to be two
> sets of
> > axis: the constraint axis (the blue line in your
> > screen shot. This is what you are locking to BTW,
> not
> > the X-axis) and an "align" axis (in this
> screenshot,
> > the Y-axis).
> >
> > Once again, it's a matter of interface, ease of
> use
> > and bloatedness. There's a limit to cramming
> features,
> > at one point, there should be a separate tool.
> >
> >   
> I looked a bit in the source today to see how you
> have build the 
> snapping-system. You have done a great work.

Thanks,

> Do I understand you right if I say that you are
> using this theory 
> http://linet.se/blender/snappingtheory.png ?

If D brought the snap point (the vertice you are
moving) to the closest position (along its constrained
axis) to the snap target (what it is snapping to),
then yes. That's not the case in your drawing.

Also, we have to keep in mind that snapping works for
rotation too (and maybe resize, not sure if I did that
already or not, can't really access the code here). So
the definition of "smallest distance" varies depending
on the transformation.

Martin


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. 
Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html 

!DSPAM:80,464c7b6356691986810771!