Glitch or consequence?

Yep! Single vertex bug. Looking via the Ruby API I find:

  • The large outer Face doesn’t recognize the smaller one as an inner loop; it runs all the way underneath it.
  • The smaller Face appears to be OK, but…
  • There is a duplicate, garbled Face whose outer loop encloses both the small (void) area and the smaller Face. Its outer loop traces Edges in the order numbered in the attached image, in effect creating a bow-tie.

Does the startpoint of the rectangle has any effect on the order ? Or does SketchUp follow a standard order ? It now seems to go counterclockwise.
@Wo3Dan this is actually how I draw an ‘8’ , starting upperleft ,counterclockwise!

Hence my remark: a twisted “8”.

@MikeWayzovski, are you a SketchUp developer :wink:

Not an developer😬 Just curieus in how the software is processing. Since this glitch is here for ever it might even not be a glitch at all, but something which is just how the software works and users should be aware of it!
Since @franquin specifically asked for an explanation of the behavior he noticed, I suddenly became aware of why I left this method of creating geometry upon geometry, you can’t predict the outcome, although , IMO, it should be predictable since ‘The software doesn’t play dice’ , it just follows some algorithm.

I can’t see any way to justify this as how the software is supposed to work. It is clearly a flaw in the logic that yields bad results. But yes, users should be aware that this problem lurks in waiting and can bite at unexpected moments. It isn’t officially documented. Users learn about it when the old hands point it out on forums like this.

1 Like

Please elaborate; This is interesting…
What do you mean by that?
What method are you contrasting it with, and/or using now?

In your first description you described the method of rounding the edges of a rectangle by drawing a smaller rectangle in of the corners, and I also used this method for creating profiles for H- and I- beams etc. It worked for me, but I also experienced the ‘glitch’ sometimes ( when I forgot to erase some of the little rectangles) and I always thought this was due to the fact that by doing so, you are creating geometry on existing geometry and the software doesn’t know anymore what you are trying to achieve, untill you tell the software that you really did not need the inner rectangles ( you would only need them temporarely for the centerpoint of the arc). You would tell it by deleting the lines. I figuered: this method is not ‘clean’ , as you’re first creating some geometry and then deleting the parts of that created geometry which you don’t need! Hence the evolution to the guidelines method as guides are created for this purpose. Less clicks, ‘cleaner’ geometry.
The second evolution in creating rounded rectangles came when I discovered that you can alter the radius of the arc via the entity- info ! Now I did not even had to create guidelines! Less clicks, even cleaner geometry!
I always explained the first method as that you are stacking geometry upon geometry and that the software uses algorimes that cannot interprete them.
I also think that it is not really a glitch, but that ’ it goes with the terratory’
Did you know that Kurt Gödel - Wikipedia
already postulated that you can not have a system in which all possible outcome is generated? We just have to choose which system (software) serves our purpose…

Thanks Mike,
Your method is a lot “cleaner” as you say, and I’ll certainly save a lot of time in using it. Workflow is a big factor in any app’s efficiency, which can’t be overstated.
I appreciate your taking the time.

This topic was automatically closed after 91 days. New replies are no longer allowed.