Lisp all solid to hatch
@renanemeyer wrote:
I would like to know if it is possible to do the reverse with a lisp? Transform all solid of the drawing into hatch, without having to do selection. it's possible?
Transform to what hatch pattern ? If want the "no selection" mode, you need to hardcode the target hatch pattern name on the code.
Drawing sample perhaps?
Try this.
As @pbejse told in his post, always attach sample drawing with current state and what you want to achieve.
It helps us to create code and to grasp your idea i.e. what you actually want to do.
This code will convert solids to hatch (ANSI31 pattern).
What you would probably want is to join all solids to single area, and then hatch it with a singe hatch.
To merge hatches to single one you can use code at this link.
(defun c:solids2hatch ( / take pointlist entmakex-hatch ss i )
(defun take (amount lst / ret)(repeat amount (setq ret (cons (car lst) (take (1- amount) (cdr lst))))))
(defun pointlist (lst / ret) (while lst (setq ret (cons (take 2 lst) ret) lst (cdddr lst))) (reverse ret))
(defun entmakex-hatch (L a n s)
;; By ElpanovEvgeniy
;; L - list point
;; A - angle hatch
;; N - name pattern
;; S - scale
;; returne - hatch ename
(entmakex
(apply
'append
(list
(list '(0 . "HATCH")
'(100 . "AcDbEntity")
'(410 . "Model")
'(100 . "AcDbHatch")
'(10 0.0 0.0 0.0)
'(210 0.0 0.0 1.0)
'(2 . "ANSI31")
(if (= n "SOLID")
'(70 . 1)
'(70 . 0)
) ;_ if
'(71 . 0)
(cons 91 (length l))
) ;_ list
(apply 'append
(mapcar '(lambda (a)
(apply 'append
(list (list '(92 . 7) '(72 . 0) '(73 . 1) (cons 93 (length a)))
(mapcar '(lambda (b) (cons 10 b)) a)
'((97 . 0))
) ;_ list
) ;_ apply
) ;_ lambda
l
) ;_ mapcar
) ;_ apply
(list '(75 . 0)
'(76 . 1)
(cons 52 a)
(cons 41 s)
'(77 . 0)
'(78 . 1)
(cons 53 a)
'(43 . 0.)
'(44 . 0.)
'(45 . 1.)
'(46 . 1.)
'(79 . 0)
'(47 . 1.)
'(98 . 2)
'(10 0. 0. 0.0)
'(10 0. 0. 0.0)
'(451 . 0)
'(460 . 0.0)
'(461 . 0.0)
'(452 . 1)
'(462 . 1.0)
'(453 . 2)
'(463 . 0.0)
'(463 . 1.0)
'(470 . "LINEAR")
) ;_ list
) ;_ list
) ;_ apply
) ;_ entmakex
) ;_ defun
(setq ss (ssget '((0 . "SOLID"))) i -1)
(while (< (setq i (1+ i)) (sslength ss))
(entmakex-hatch (list(pointlist (vlax-get (vlax-ename->vla-object (ssname ss i)) 'Coordinates))) 0 "ANSI31" 1 )
(entdel (ssname ss i))
)
(princ)
)
If this works for you, select is as a solution.
Miljenko Hatlak
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
@philsogood wrote:
..... could it be possible to modify the lisp in order to select items instead of converting all objects in the file?
If you're talking about the accepted-solution routine in Message 5, you should be able to do that by simply removing the "_X" [= find everything] selection mode element:
(if (setq s (ssget '((0 . "SOLID"))))EDIT: Not quite, after all, at least sometimes. With only that change, this part:
(foreach e (mapcar 'cadr (ssnamex s))will step through a list that, depending on the way the Solids were selected, may contain items other than only entity names of Solids, that relate to the selection method(s). Later I'll try posting something to have it process only the entity names, if someone doesn't beat me to it.
Further EDIT: I notice that some suggestions [including the accepted one] involve first converting the Solids to Polylines, and then Hatching the resulting Polylines. That's a waste -- the Hatches can be drawn directly from the Solids' information, without the middleman. I worked on an approach that does that, and does not have the list problem, and works in any UCS, and prevents selection of Solids on locked Layers, and has an option to retain or delete the Solids, and so on, but questions arise:
Would one want to convert all Solids to Hatches always in the SOLID pattern [if the only purpose is to change the object type but not the appearance], or some other always pattern, or have the option to specify the pattern name?
Would one want the option of a Hatch of lines [not SOLID] over retained Solids, contrasting in color and maybe on different Layers, or should the Hatch always get all properties of the Solid [which would make the Hatch invisible if Solids are retained]?
If contrasting, should that be done by keeping the Solid behind the Hatch, or using a background color in the Hatch itself?
If overlaying like that, should pulling the Hatch to the front in draw order be built in?
