point(1,0,0) + (unitZ * 3) = point(1,0,3)
0 * 3 does not equal 3. This is really confusing and really irritiating when you're trying to learn this software.
Point(1,0,0) + (unitZ + 3) = Point(1,0,3) makes more sense. My opinion anyway.
As it stands, the ETO documentation has improved greatly from a year ago. What's lacking is documentation describing when to use specific features. I suggest to make a best practices knowledgebase which answers questions for anyone looking to start a new project.
Some example answers might include:
This may look like a lot of suggestions at once. All I'm asking is for someone who has built a number of ETO projects to put a bunch of advice somewhere ETO developers can read it. The more topics covered the better.
I'd be happy to clarify since each of these are problems I've run into over the last year. I'd be happy to clarify or give a longer list if anyone wants.
It would be extremely useful to have Level of Detail support in assemblies. It's very common for customers to use levels of detail in their drawings and without this built in one either has to code their own mechanism to create the levels of detail or set the hidden parts rule on the drawing views to hide the components that they don't want. The hiddenParts approach is slow and leaves the customer with a drawing different than what they would create manually.
It would be very useful if we had a couple of dropdowns that included Children, Methods, and Rules as it is with .net. In .net, it lists all of the methods in the active class. This would be useful in the Design Editor as well as in Visual Studio when you are working with design files.
This would be especially useful on large designs where you may have lots of rules and/or children. You should be able to click on an item (ex. "Length") and the window will jump to that rule.
It would be very useful to have a #Region directive in the Intent language as there is in .net.
For those unfamiliar: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/sd032a17%2
Basically regions allow you to expand/collapse sections of code. This makes organization much easier.
#Region "Child Rules" Child testCenters As :IvSphere, Quantity = Length(testParts)
origin = GetTestPartPoint(child.index)
ignorePosition? = False
Radius = 5
color = "Green"
End Child #End Region
Method GetTestPartPoint(mIndex As Integer) As Point
Dim xyz As List = nth(mIndex, testParts).CenterOfMass
Return Point(first(xyz), second(xyz), third(xyz))
Sorting by the values in the properties grid will give us the ability to more easily find rules based on the expected values. This is especially helpful when working on datasets by others who have not properly documented the rules in a way that it is easy to find the rules in question. In the case below, I know that the tank is 72 inches tall from my measurement of the Inventor model. If I could sort by the Values then I would be able to very quickly find that the associated rule is very likely TankHeight. My understanding is that the grid below is a DevExpress grid and column sorting is a property setting. That simple and quick change would be quite helpful for debugging.
Inventor ETO should have the capability to reverse engineer and configure from an existing iPart / iAssembly factory + incorporate rules from iLogic. There should also be an option to create configurations through a flowchart / flowdiagram rather than through code.
Have an improve Project Editor. Let say DesignC is included in DesignB. If you include DesignB in DesignA then Design C is automatically included. Today I would need to inlude both DesignB and DesignC in DesginA. Maybe an option like (keep design hierarchy).
I would like to see a "favorites" option in the property grid. This would allow us to check the star next to the rule name and mark it as a favorite. Then we would have a third sorting option to sort by favorites. I suppose the favorite sorting option could apply to both the categorized sorting and A-Z sorting.
Integrate the Smart Connector functionality found in Factory Design Suite into ETO. The ETO projects that I work on have many configured machines inside a main assembly. To have the ability to configure a machine, drag the machine onto the model window and then have it attach to a chosen piece of geometry would be a great addition to the user experience.