PasteBlockWithName
It's no different from anything else that prompts for the User to enter some text. It doesn't go into the PasteBlock command until that's done, so I'm not sure there's a way to change the look of the cursor. It could conceivably be done by completing the native PasteBlock command first, and afterwards asking for the name, but that leaves open the possibility that the User might cancel it without giving it a name, and then the wacky Block name would remain.
But here's a suggested alternative that should make it obvious that it's underway, without the User needing to notice a prompt at the Command: line, and entirely apart from the question of what the cursor looks like. Replace the first (while) function [between the (defun) line and the (command) line] with this:
...
(while
(not
(and
(setq newname (lisped "Name for Block to be Inserted")); calls up Text Editor with content pre-selected for replacement
(setq newname (vl-string-trim " " newname)); remove any leading/trailing space(s)
(/= newname ""); didn't either clear out or enter only space(s)
(/= newname "Name for Block to be Inserted"); didn't just hit Enter
(not (tblsearch "block" newname)); name not already in use
); and
); not
(alert
(cond
((= newname "") "Empty string or only space(s) not allowed;\nyou must supply a Block name.")
((= newname "Name for Block to be Inserted") "You must supply a new Block name.")
(T "\nThat Block name is already in use.")
); cond
); alert
); while
...
@ВeekeeCZ wrote:
.... in your lisp you have written note about Scale and Rotation. Where this can be controlled? (In AutoCAD not LISP) ....
When PASTEBLOCK [or PASTECLIP] is asking for an insertion point, you can type an S for the Scale option [XYZ all together], R for Rotation, X or Y or Z for just the X or Y or Z scale factor, give it values, and it will go back to the insertion-point prompt, and the dragged image will reflect the options you've used. You can use as many of them as you want before getting around to giving it an insertion point. Since it doesn't display a prompt with options, I'm not sure whether it honors all the same ones as the command-line version of the Insert command.
@miroko wrote:
....
I noticed however that there is 'Full editor' button. But it does not work actually, when i click then i get error. Actually this is not needed this FullEditor since we are not formatting anyhow the name so would be nice to just remove the button, how to do that?
Another issue is that I noticed that 'Ctrl+Shift+V' will be not active when this lisp is loaded. Is there a way that 'Ctrl+Shift+V' will invoke this new command? Should be added something to code?
....
I don't know of a way to remove the Full Editor button from the Text Editor window that (lisped) calls up. Double-clicking on plain Text brings up one that doesn't have that [though I think that varies with version and certain System Variables], but I haven't found a way to get that simpler Editor except by having a piece of Text drawn. I suppose it might be possible to have the routine actually draw a temporary one, call up the Editor on that, extract the content after editing for its checks, and after all is satisfied, delete the Text. But that could involve changing System Variables, and requires a middleman Text entity, meaning *error* handling should be added, and so on. I think a small amount of education of Users, to not pick the Full Editor button, would be both simpler and safer.
Ctrl+Shift+V is inactive if there is no drawing-entity content in the Clipboard to Paste in. When there is, for me it does invoke this command. Make sure you have used COPYCLIP or COPYBASE to put some drawing entities into the Clipboard first, and check again whether it works.
@miroko wrote:
....
When we copy block from one drawing to other with this function then it works nice. But the problem is that when we i.e. have a block in ‘drawing A’ and copy the block and use this command to paste still into the same ‘drawing A’ then function is of course doing it, but it is actually renaming the existing block.
Users would wish to be able to use this function to paste block into same drawing but so that a new block definition is created and not that it is renaming that particular block.
Would that be that possible?
....
Just use ordinary PASTECLIP [Ctrl+V] for that. A routine like this one has no way of knowing whether what is in the Clipboard ready for Pasting in is already a Block, or a Line, or a whole set of different kinds of objects, so it can't decide whether to ask you for a Block name or not -- it just always does.
But I think you'll find that it is not actually renaming the Block that you copied. It is making a new Block definition that contains an insertion of that Block, but if you Explode the new Block, you will be left with an insertion of the other Block still under its original name. And you can Insert more of that Block under its original name, in addition to being able to Insert it as a nested object within the new Block.
@miroko wrote:
.... user would want that it makes a new definition and keeping old one completelly untouched and independent.
dont know if thats possible, just asking
....
In addition to the link from BeekeeCZ, there are other routines out there, as well as suggestions of approaches without routines, to create a new Block definition duplicating another one but under a different name, without affecting the "source" Block definition.
