.NET

Reply
*Anders Pettersson
Message 1 of 13 (175 Views)

.NET and Autocad versions...

175 Views, 12 Replies
06-08-2005 01:44 AM
In wich versions of AutoCad can I write C# programs for?
I'm also intrested in ADT versions...
*J. Daniel Smith
Message 2 of 13 (174 Views)

Re: .NET and Autocad versions...

06-08-2005 07:32 AM in reply to: *Anders Pettersson
Both AutoCAD 2005 and AutoCAD 2006 expose a .NET API; the coverage is much
more extensive in AutoCAD 2006.

Using C# with earlier versions is possible with COM Interop or even
P/Invoke.

Dan

"Anders Pettersson" wrote in message
news:4868401@discussion.autodesk.com...
In wich versions of AutoCad can I write C# programs for?
I'm also intrested in ADT versions...
New Member
Quanci
Posts: 1
Registered: ‎06-09-2005
Message 3 of 13 (174 Views)

Re: .NET and Autocad versions...

06-09-2005 12:40 AM in reply to: *Anders Pettersson
AutoCAD 2005 had a partial .NET implementation (say 60% of ObjectARX coverage) and AutoCAD 2006 has a virtually complete .NET implementation (say 95%... the main part missing is custom object creation).

ADT 2006 is the first version of ADT with .NET support with a partial implementation (say 40%)... more to come next year.
*Tony Tanzillo
Message 4 of 13 (174 Views)

Re: .NET and Autocad versions...

06-09-2005 12:45 PM in reply to: *Anders Pettersson
This is a bit misleading.

If you quantify coverage in terms of the number of native
ObjectARX classes wrapped, it's not even close.

If you consider that many wrappers do not expose the
complete functionality of the underlying native class,
your even farther away.

95% is essentially a fairy tale. Not even taking into
account custom object creation, I'd guess that in terms
of functionality, it is about 50%. Consider that AdUi and
AcUi are not exposed at all via managed wrappers, with
the exception of Palettes.

--
http://www.caddzone.com

AcadXTabs: MDI Document Tabs for AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006
http://www.acadxtabs.com

wrote in message news:4869735@discussion.autodesk.com...
AutoCAD 2005 had a partial .NET implementation (say 60% of ObjectARX coverage) and AutoCAD 2006 has a virtually complete
.NET implementation (say 95%... the main part missing is custom object creation).

ADT 2006 is the first version of ADT with .NET support with a partial implementation (say 40%)... more to come next
year.
*Albert Szilvasy
Message 5 of 13 (174 Views)

Re: .NET and Autocad versions...

06-09-2005 02:44 PM in reply to: *Anders Pettersson
I don't want to get into the percentage discussion. 3 things that I'd like
to point out:

1. I don't think we ever want to wrap the AcUi, AdUi functionality. Winforms
do a much better job.
2. Please don't hesitate to point out when you run into holes. We will try
to fix them.
3. I'd like to think that the .NET API does a better job at usability than
the C++ API. Compare acedSSGet to the various GetSelection methods. Or the
ease of creating a palette using the .NET API vs. using AcUi/AdUi.

Albert

"Tony Tanzillo" wrote in message
news:4870748@discussion.autodesk.com...
This is a bit misleading.

If you quantify coverage in terms of the number of native
ObjectARX classes wrapped, it's not even close.

If you consider that many wrappers do not expose the
complete functionality of the underlying native class,
your even farther away.

95% is essentially a fairy tale. Not even taking into
account custom object creation, I'd guess that in terms
of functionality, it is about 50%. Consider that AdUi and
AcUi are not exposed at all via managed wrappers, with
the exception of Palettes.

--
http://www.caddzone.com

AcadXTabs: MDI Document Tabs for AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006
http://www.acadxtabs.com

wrote in message news:4869735@discussion.autodesk.com...
AutoCAD 2005 had a partial .NET implementation (say 60% of ObjectARX
coverage) and AutoCAD 2006 has a virtually complete
.NET implementation (say 95%... the main part missing is custom object
creation).

ADT 2006 is the first version of ADT with .NET support with a partial
implementation (say 40%)... more to come next
year.
*Tony Tanzillo
Message 6 of 13 (174 Views)

Re: .NET and Autocad versions...

06-09-2005 03:46 PM in reply to: *Anders Pettersson
Well, I don't agree completely with regards to AcUi/AdUi.

That isn't to suggest that you should *directly* expose things
like CAcUiDialog, but rather that AutoCAD-specific functionality
provided by that and other AcUi/AdUi classes most definitely
should be exposed in the form of WinForms-based classes.

I also feel that all of the property inspector functionality and its
custom controls (most of which are heavily dependent on COM)
should be exposed as managed wrappers if for no other reason,
consistency's sake.

Regarding holes, see my other post :-)

And please keep in mind that I've not really explored or used
the Managed wrappers very much, and I'm still seeing lots of
missed opportunities. I hope it's not the tip of an iceberg.


--
http://www.caddzone.com

AcadXTabs: MDI Document Tabs for AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006
http://www.acadxtabs.com

"Albert Szilvasy" wrote in message news:4871040@discussion.autodesk.com...
I don't want to get into the percentage discussion. 3 things that I'd like
to point out:

1. I don't think we ever want to wrap the AcUi, AdUi functionality. Winforms
do a much better job.
2. Please don't hesitate to point out when you run into holes. We will try
to fix them.
3. I'd like to think that the .NET API does a better job at usability than
the C++ API. Compare acedSSGet to the various GetSelection methods. Or the
ease of creating a palette using the .NET API vs. using AcUi/AdUi.

Albert

"Tony Tanzillo" wrote in message
news:4870748@discussion.autodesk.com...
This is a bit misleading.

If you quantify coverage in terms of the number of native
ObjectARX classes wrapped, it's not even close.

If you consider that many wrappers do not expose the
complete functionality of the underlying native class,
your even farther away.

95% is essentially a fairy tale. Not even taking into
account custom object creation, I'd guess that in terms
of functionality, it is about 50%. Consider that AdUi and
AcUi are not exposed at all via managed wrappers, with
the exception of Palettes.

--
http://www.caddzone.com

AcadXTabs: MDI Document Tabs for AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006
http://www.acadxtabs.com

wrote in message news:4869735@discussion.autodesk.com...
AutoCAD 2005 had a partial .NET implementation (say 60% of ObjectARX
coverage) and AutoCAD 2006 has a virtually complete
.NET implementation (say 95%... the main part missing is custom object
creation).

ADT 2006 is the first version of ADT with .NET support with a partial
implementation (say 40%)... more to come next
year.
*Albert Szilvasy
Message 7 of 13 (174 Views)

Re: .NET and Autocad versions...

06-09-2005 06:48 PM in reply to: *Anders Pettersson
I'm really curious what you have in mind with regards to AdUi/AcUi. What do
they provide that winforms doesn't? Note that we did provide access to
palettes because that is indeed AutoCAD specific. But what else?

Yes, property palette is an interesting animal. Of course, Winforms provides
a more extensible property browser called the PropertyGrid. I see an need
for bridge between Property Palette and the Property Grid but the Property
Palette is a primary concern for people who create custom objects.

Very good. Keep exploring and post your concerns here. I know there are
opportunities and we are not complete by any means but we are making
progress.

Albert

"Tony Tanzillo" wrote in message
news:4871092@discussion.autodesk.com...
Well, I don't agree completely with regards to AcUi/AdUi.

That isn't to suggest that you should *directly* expose things
like CAcUiDialog, but rather that AutoCAD-specific functionality
provided by that and other AcUi/AdUi classes most definitely
should be exposed in the form of WinForms-based classes.

I also feel that all of the property inspector functionality and its
custom controls (most of which are heavily dependent on COM)
should be exposed as managed wrappers if for no other reason,
consistency's sake.

Regarding holes, see my other post :-)

And please keep in mind that I've not really explored or used
the Managed wrappers very much, and I'm still seeing lots of
missed opportunities. I hope it's not the tip of an iceberg.


--
http://www.caddzone.com

AcadXTabs: MDI Document Tabs for AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006
http://www.acadxtabs.com

"Albert Szilvasy" wrote in message
news:4871040@discussion.autodesk.com...
I don't want to get into the percentage discussion. 3 things that I'd like
to point out:

1. I don't think we ever want to wrap the AcUi, AdUi functionality. Winforms
do a much better job.
2. Please don't hesitate to point out when you run into holes. We will try
to fix them.
3. I'd like to think that the .NET API does a better job at usability than
the C++ API. Compare acedSSGet to the various GetSelection methods. Or the
ease of creating a palette using the .NET API vs. using AcUi/AdUi.

Albert

"Tony Tanzillo" wrote in message
news:4870748@discussion.autodesk.com...
This is a bit misleading.

If you quantify coverage in terms of the number of native
ObjectARX classes wrapped, it's not even close.

If you consider that many wrappers do not expose the
complete functionality of the underlying native class,
your even farther away.

95% is essentially a fairy tale. Not even taking into
account custom object creation, I'd guess that in terms
of functionality, it is about 50%. Consider that AdUi and
AcUi are not exposed at all via managed wrappers, with
the exception of Palettes.

--
http://www.caddzone.com

AcadXTabs: MDI Document Tabs for AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006
http://www.acadxtabs.com

wrote in message news:4869735@discussion.autodesk.com...
AutoCAD 2005 had a partial .NET implementation (say 60% of ObjectARX
coverage) and AutoCAD 2006 has a virtually complete
.NET implementation (say 95%... the main part missing is custom object
creation).

ADT 2006 is the first version of ADT with .NET support with a partial
implementation (say 40%)... more to come next
year.
Active Contributor
tangferry
Posts: 43
Registered: ‎04-21-2005
Message 8 of 13 (174 Views)

Re: .NET and Autocad versions...

06-09-2005 10:14 PM in reply to: *Anders Pettersson
But you can not use conditinal selectionset.For example,I cannot select both circles or lines with Getselection.

3. I'd like to think that the .NET API does a better job at usability than
the C++ API. Compare acedSSGet to the various GetSelection methods. Or the
ease of creating a palette using the .NET API vs. using AcUi/AdUi.

Albert
*Albert Szilvasy
Message 9 of 13 (174 Views)

Re: .NET and Autocad versions...

06-09-2005 11:20 PM in reply to: *Anders Pettersson
Yes. This however is simply a bug in the code. We wanted enable conditional
filtering in its full glory. On the other hand the .NET GetSelection method
returns all the details of how the objects got selected. You simply can't do
that using the COM API and you have to go through some arcane resbuf parsing
to get this data using C++. You can't implement commands like trim or
stretch without knowing what part of the object was selected.

Albert

wrote in message news:4871213@discussion.autodesk.com...
But you can not use conditinal selectionset.For example,I cannot select both
circles or lines with Getselection.

3. I'd like to think that the .NET API does a better job at usability than
the C++ API. Compare acedSSGet to the various GetSelection methods. Or the
ease of creating a palette using the .NET API vs. using AcUi/AdUi.

Albert
*Tony Tanzillo
Message 10 of 13 (174 Views)

Re: .NET and Autocad versions...

06-09-2005 11:35 PM in reply to: *Anders Pettersson
wrote

>> But you can not use conditinal selectionset.For example,
>> I cannot select both circles or lines with Getselection.

Yes you can.

new TypedValue(0, "CIRCLE,LINE');

--
http://www.caddzone.com

AcadXTabs: MDI Document Tabs for AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006
http://www.acadxtabs.com

3. I'd like to think that the .NET API does a better job at usability than
the C++ API. Compare acedSSGet to the various GetSelection methods. Or the
ease of creating a palette using the .NET API vs. using AcUi/AdUi.

Albert
Post to the Community

Have questions about Autodesk products? Ask the community.

New Post
Need installation help?

Start with some of our most frequented solutions or visit the Installation and Licensing Forum to get help installing your software.