Forced delete (embedded) blocks

HELLO,

i`AM LOOKING FOR A LISP TO FORCE DELETE A (EMBEDDED)BLOCK FROM A DRAWING. SOMETHING LIKE LAYER DELETE.

THANKS

JAAP

Purge command with Block option?

Are the blocks named or anonymous?

Check this out .....

(defun c:test (/ ss ss1 e Blks)
 ; Tharwat 17. 02. 2011
 (if (and (setq ss (ssget "_+.:S" '((0 . "INSERT"))))
        (setq ss1 (ssname ss 0))
            (setq e (entget ss1))
        )
   (progn
     (setq Blks (ssget "_x" (list '(0 . "INSERT")
                      (cons 2 (cdr (assoc 2 e))))))
          (command "_.Erase" Blks "")
    )
      (princ)
   )
 (princ)
 )

Tharwat

NO, IS NOT WORKING. WHEN I GIVE THE COMMAND "TEST". IT ASKS TO SELECT.-->

NOTHING IS DONE. AUTOCAD COMES BACK WITH: Command: TEST Unknown command "TEST". Press F1 for help.

WORKING WITH AUTOCAD ELECTRICAL 2010

JAAP

On the contrary , It does the job quickly .

But with your Electrical version of Cad which is I have no idea if would except Lisp or not though .

NO, IS NOT WORKING. WHEN I GIVE THE COMMAND "TEST". IT ASKS TO SELECT.-->

NOTHING IS DONE. AUTOCAD COMES BACK WITH: Command: TEST Unknown command "TEST". Press F1 for help.

 

 

 

WORKING WITH AUTOCAD ELECTRICAL 2010

 

JAAP

Sounds like you haven't loaded the lisp correctly, see these instructions.

Also, please stop with the caps, being shout at is not fun.

You may want to reconsider this line:

(defun c:test (/ ss ss1 e Blks)
 ; Tharwat 17. 02. 2011
 (if (and (setq ss (ssget "_+.:S" '((0 . "INSERT"))))
        (setq ss1 (ssname ss 0))
            (setq e (entget ss1))
        )
   (progn
     (setq Blks (ssget "_x" (list '(0 . "INSERT")
                      [color=red][b]([/b][/color][color=red]cons 2 (cdr[/color] [color=blue][b]([/b]assoc 2 e[b])[/b][/color][color=red])[b])[/b][/color])))
          (command "_.Erase" Blks "")
    )
      (princ)
   )
 (princ)
 )

For fun, here's another option:

(defun c:FOO  (/ *acadDoc* eName ss blockItem)
 (vl-load-com)
 (vla-startundomark
   (setq *acadDoc*
          (vla-get-activedocument (vlax-get-acad-object))))
 (if (and (setq eName (car (entsel "\nSelect the Block You Wish to Delete: ")))
          (setq ss (ssget "_x" (list '(0 . "INSERT") (assoc 2 (entget eName))))))
   (progn
     (vlax-for x  (setq ss (vla-get-activeselectionset *acadDoc*))
       (cond (blockItem)
             ((setq blockItem (vla-item (vla-get-blocks *acadDoc*)
                                        (vla-get-effectivename x)))))
       (vla-delete x))
     (vla-delete blockItem)
     (vla-delete ss)))
 (vla-endundomark *acadDoc*)
 (princ))

Option #2 will also remove the block reference from the blocks collection.

You may want to reconsider this line:

Hello Renderman .

I guess that the following two lines are the same according to the use of them .

(cons 2 (cdr (assoc 2 e)))
(assoc 2 e)

But for the situation of building the search filtering list , the cons might be better than (assoc 2 e) What you think ?

Always cracks me up when I see that.

You'll laugh, I always try to say it nicely... because I know there's one coming around the corner, pointed at me.

I guess that the following two lines are the same according to the use of them .

 

(cons 2 (cdr (assoc 2 e)))
(assoc 2 e)

More specifically, they yield the same result... that is what's important.

But for the situation of building the search filtering list , the cons might be better than (assoc 2 e) What you think ?

I think not... I'm not a fan of doing extra work for the same result.

Edit:

How's the old saying go... "Brevity is the Soul of Wit"

I think not... I'm not a fan of doing extra work for the same result.

 

Edit:

How's the old saying go... "Brevity is the Soul of Wit"

 

 

But I am a fan of learning a lot, and by time knowledge would become easily obtained and given at the right situation.

And would become more genius than Genious :wink:

 

Regards

Hello Renderman .

 

I guess that the following two lines are the same according to the use of them .

 

(cons 2 (cdr (assoc 2 e)))
(assoc 2 e)

 

But for the situation of building the search filtering list , the cons might be better than (assoc 2 e) What you think ?

All cons is going is recreating a dotted pair list. Why create extra work for yourself?

But I am a fan of learning a lot, and by time knowledge would become easily obtained and given at the right situation.

And would become more genius than Genious :wink:

 

Regards

That's great, Tharwat... but did you understand the point being made?

I think that when you (genuinely) compare the amount of code/work in yours:

...
 (if (and (setq ss (ssget "_+.:S" '((0 . "INSERT"))))
          (setq ss1 (ssname ss 0))
          (setq e (entget ss1)))
   (progn
     ([color=black]setq Blks (ssget "_x" (list '(0 . "INSERT") (cons 2 (cdr (assoc 2 e))))))[/color][color=black]...[/color]

... To that of mine:

[color=black]...[/color]
[color=black](if (and [/color][color=black](setq eName (car (entsel "\nSelect the Block You Wish to Delete: ")))[/color]
[color=black]        (setq ss (ssget "_x" (list '(0 . "INSERT") (assoc 2 (entget eName))))))[/color]
...

... You will see (appreciate?) the inherent advantage to the latter.

Cheers!

 

I think that when you (genuinely) compare the amount of code/work in yours:

Cheers!

Yes Renderman .

That's what I intended to code at the beginning of the first post and I do not know why I changed my mind with it to ssget .

 

... You will see (appreciate?) the inherent advantage to the latter.

 

Here is the message that I have received while invoking your codes , I do not why .

Command: foo

 

Select the Block You Wish to Delete: ; error: Automation Error. Object is

referenced

 

Many thanks

All cons is going is recreating a dotted pair list. Why create extra work for yourself?

Yeah.... I should have used it with assoc only without the cons function .

Appreciated

Here is the message that I have received while invoking your codes , I do not why .

 

Command: foo

 

Select the Block You Wish to Delete: ; error: Automation Error. Object is referenced

Interesting... which line breaks in VLIDE?

First guess would be the line that deletes the block reference... the error suggests that the block exists elsewhere, perhaps nested inside of another block?

Admittedly, my code does not handle nested blocks, only primary.

First guess would be the line that deletes the block reference... the error suggests that the block exists elsewhere, perhaps nested inside of another block?

 

Admittedly, my code does not handle nested blocks, only primary.

Great guess .

The selected Block was nested to another which caused that message to appear .

Appreciated.

Tharwat

Great guess .

 

The selected Block was nested to another which caused that message to appear .

Ohhhh! That's what the OP meant by '(embedded)'.

I'm busy at the moment, but will try to revist the original request, given this late revelation....

Ohhhh! That's what the OP meant by '(embedded)'.

 

I'm busy at the moment, but will try to revist the original request, given this late revelation....

We have been dancing out of the ring since the first post .

Although my codes would escape slowly.

Thanks