place objects with lisp or vba

[Jack_O'neill]

Many thanks to both of you for your help. Back in the R12-14 days, I could manage a bit of lisp code on my own. Then the place I was working for at the time switched to Mechanical Desktop, and we simply didn't need it as much. After several years of that, I got out of drafting altogether for about 4 years, and now I can't get anything to work. Even old stuff that I wrote years ago won't work on the newer versions, and I can't figure out how to fix it. Obviously lisp and Autocad has evolved considerably since then.

 

There was stuff in both versions of this that I didn't recognize, and have no idea what it does. Gonna have to hit the books I guess.

 

"You must unlearn all that you have learned!"--Yoda

[fixo]

This is my opinion only:

you need change the insertion point of

simmetrical block to it's center in this case

you can get the exact position, say you

will write insertion points in the text file etc

but there is need to rewrite the lisp I sent

 

~'J'~

[Lee Mac]

This is my opinion only:

you need change the insertion point of

simmetrical block to it's center in this case

you can get the exact position, say you

will write insertion points in the text file etc

but there is need to rewrite the lisp I sent

 

~'J'~

 

I would second this point also, as, in the LISP, I could insert the block to the right of the Polyline just using the insertion point as the intersection of the polyline and horizontal line - but, when it came to the left hand side, I had to "correct" the insertion point by 6.5515 (width of the block), so that it would be adjacent to the polyline.

 

A base point in the center of the block would make things more "logical" and standard.

[Jack_O'neill]

Logical and standard are two concepts that my employer has no inkling of. We have piles of little blocks and symbols that there seems to be no rhyme or reason to where the insertion point is, or what layer and linetype is used. We have some so-called "standard details" that have the wrong parts in them. Sadly, all this stuff is on a corporate server and are treated as "sacred scrolls" which only those with special dispensation from the corporate IT gods can manipulate. Every time I've submitted a request to fix some of that stuff, I get a canned reply to the effect that "these were created with a specific purpose and changing any facet of these symbols can effect processes that I may not be aware of".

 

You see, like most dinosaurs, we have a bunch of proprietary software created to do things for us by people who either don't work there anymore or by software companies that went out of business 25 years ago. Remember my earlier post about how this little diamond's location was used by a machine to locate certain operations? It may well be that the software for that uses the screwy insertion point in some way, and I'd be willing to bet that it was done that way on purpose to throw off "industrial spies". Yes, I've heard them use that term, and yes they are scared to death someone will steal this 30 year old "secret" when in fact most of our competitors are laughing at us for using this old crap.

 

Thanks again for your help guys.

[Lee Mac]

Thank you Jack for your honest and rather witty response to our suggestion.

 

After reading your reply, it made me realise that the company that I worked for, (remaining nameless of course for obvious reasons), before I came to university worked in much the same manner.

 

Our competitors "laughed" at us for doing things the way we did them, and the only reason we did things the way we did was because it seemed "that was the way it was always done." If that makes any sense... (I'm sure you get the idea). And this attitude led to our so called "standards" becoming anything but standard. Our block library (if you could call it that) was strewn with irregularities - not only with base points of blocks, but also linetype/layer usage/colour and many other aspects which I daren't go into.

 

It seemed too much hassle to stop for one moment and think: "Hey, if we standardised things, we might just be able to up our efficiency a considerable amount"... but the "tradition" of our ways superceded this idea and still we were left to trudge along.

 

I sense that this attitude is more widely spread than previously thought - especially in the design industry, in which "standards" means so much to most people, and words like "change" are not thrown around too often - but it would be interesting to hear the views and opinions of others in similar situations.

 

Anyway, thats my rant for the day - hope you enjoyed reading it.

 

Lee

[Jack_O'neill]

If you want to know how those policies are created, take a look at this, it's hilarious, but such a parallel to life:

 

http://www.crypticide.com/dropsafe/article/1928

[Lee Mac]

HAHAHA that is absolutely fantastic!

 

Nice one Jack