What is the difference between Delete and Remove a Component or Body?

[Anonymous]

I have been using both functions but I have not discovered the rule for using either function.

[mitirino]

suggestions for the wording:

delete => destroy

remove => (stays remove), or erase, or "pull out" 

[ANDREWKARTASHEV]

I would recommend 'remove' keeps its meaning and 'nullify' replacing delete.  Delete is to so common that it offers no clue to the function's purpose.   Nullify is more extreme and dramatic than remove and thus easier to remember.

     I removed the sphere.

     I nullified the sphere.

But regardless it's nice to see my new favorite program's creators sweat the details.  

[royshearer]

I would suggest 'Delete' for delete (as is), and either 'Clear' or 'Dissolve' instead of remove.

[tehatinrichst]

I would call the Remove option “Undo” as basically that is what happens, it is an undo of the construction of a feature/component and undoing something has a time aspect in it. Normally the undo function undoes the last step you did, but the remove is basically an undo somewhere in the changes chain.

Delete is a bit more difficult, basically you want to say: this feature/component was never born, so anything dependent of it also couldnt have been born. For me personally it is ok if it is called delete and the remove option called undo, as then for me the difference is clearer and knowing that delete really kills a feature as if it has never been created in the first place is also ok. Or maybe the name erradicate.

[davebYYPCU]

What will you rename the undo command to?

Delete, Remove and Undo are 3 distinct functions now, you need to research the actual use of Remove, because it is not Undo.

[laughingcreek]

I agree with @davebYYPCU , undo has a specific meaning that is pretty much the same for all aplications.  remove is very different then undo.  I might could get behind renaming remove to dissolve.  (dissolve is already being used in DM mode, so that might not be good either)

[Fabbunny69]

To me 'Delete' means a permanent removal of something, although in some applications it does end up in a 'Trash Can'

My confusion is with the wording 'Remove', to me it means pretty much the same as 'Delete'.

What about 'HIDE' as a alternative to 'Remove', isn't the item for all case and purposes just hidden in the timeline?

[MaxHugen]

I'm here checking out the difference as I also had a confusing outcome after a Split, when I Deleted the bit I didn't want.

One question, is there a way to "reinstate" something after it's been Removed?

[davebYYPCU]

That's what Undo does.  Remove an offcut, use undo to reinstate it.

Delete a feature, article or process, while in the same editing session you could Undo all steps just made.

Remove keeps the underlying references delete does not.

Might help....

[MaxHugen]

I tried it out, but undo also undoes anything done thereafter.

[davebYYPCU]

Correct, step by step backward to get to the restoration point.

Might help...

[jeff_strater]

no, there is unfortunately no "un-remove" feature.  If you delete or suppress the remove feature, the body comes back.

 Technically, un-remove would be possible, but to be honest, no one (internally or externally) has ever asked for it.  Interesting concept.  Not sure what workflow would require it (a body existing, then not existing for a while, then re-existing).  Do you have some workflow in mind?

[MaxHugen]

Hi Jeff. To be sure this is not something likely in demand!

It came about as I'm struggling to think of a way to "Create Fairing Between Two Bodies" . Thought I might extrude a body down into a hull plus beam, and manage to gel a shaped "shell" using techniques I saw in "Project Sketch on Curved Surface" .

But I'd already cut out the area required for the foil from the cross beam, so I used Patch to temporarily cover it up for this. I though I might need to repeat this, so wondered if the Patch could be Removed and then Recovered.

Don't know if that method will work, got sidetracked with another "cunning plan" but several hours later found this wouldn't work as F360 (or my laptop's graphics?) couldn't display a surface just 2mm wide.

[JohnSays]

Perhaps use the word "Hide" in place of "Remove." "Delete" sounds like it should be named "Forget" or "Eradicate", but with th eword "Hide" it could stay nicely as "Delete." "Remove" and "Delete" are symantically the same. "Hide" is not.

[davebYYPCU]

Hide is commonly used to hide the articles in the window, toggle the eyeball. Has no effect on the Timeline system.

Delete is dangerous, Remove is not, and Hide is already used in the visibilty controls.

[etfrench]

Remove can be dangerous as well.  It doesn't play well with external components and changes.  I've had several files which were unable to resolve removed components or bodies.  The only solution was to remodel.  Hide visibility is the only 100% safe method.

[azn56tm]

Annihilate for delete, Exile for remove

[colezajicek]

Late reply to an old thread, but before discovering the remove functionality, my split body then delete workaround to discard the unneeded portion has been to split the body, extrude the unwanted section through itself, creating a functionally nonexistent body, then combining the wanted and unwanted bodies. Since the unwanted body is invisible and can't be interacted with as it has no geometry, I haven't run into an issue where the invisible geometry causes an issue with the retained body, but combining them cleans up my bodies list.

I'm wondering if that couldn't be it's own function with that whole process running in the background, somewhat like the sketch trim function for bodies being split and discarded.