[OpenSCAD] ClikScad - create OpenSCAD models without all the typing
nop.head at gmail.com
Fri Oct 25 09:50:51 EDT 2019
The problem is it is too sparse because typically one line of code becomes
a box. So what happens to a design that is 350 lines?
OpenSCAD is a very small language, it can all be summarised on the one page
cheat sheet. I am surprised anybody would struggle to learn the syntax but
using it to create geometry is much more complex than the language. It
requires an ability to imagine a shape and then decompose it it cubes and
cylinders, etc, and be able to understand what manifold is and do high
school level trigonometry. I don't see how replacing the text with boxes
helps with any of that. Code completion if the editor achieves more or less
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 at 14:35, Doug Moen <doug at moens.org> wrote:
> @nophead: Using text is a major benefit of OpenSCAD because it can be
> pasted into emails and checked into source control. It is also fairly
> concise. I imagine the graphical representation of my typical designs would
> be an enormous tree.
> All this is true; text is important.
> @nophead: Do people really struggle much with syntax?
> Yes, some people do really struggle with syntax. The Elm community calls
> this "the syntax cliff": "How many people fall off the syntax cliff and
> give up on a language or just quit programming entirely?".
> As a professional software engineer, I can memorize large amounts of
> programming language syntax. It's a skill not everyone has, just as a
> concert pianist can sight read music notation while playing the piano in
> real time with all 10 fingers (I can't do that).
> I know that OpenSCAD is a "CAD" program, but I got into it in order to
> make art. In the 3D computer graphics business, the most popular interface
> for programming languages aimed at artists is "node and wire" syntax. For
> example, Blender has this.
> I'm not claiming that node+wire is the "best" graphical syntax. However,
> here are the benefits:
> * You don't have to memorize module names. You can select a module from
> a hierarchical menu, or find a module using keyword search,
> and then a node is created which calls the module.
> * You don't need to memorize module parameters.
> The parameters are all laid out for you in the node.
> * You can continuously tweak numeric parameters using a slider.
> You can use a colour picker to tweak a colour parameter.
> For me, the ability to tweak module parameters using a slider and get real
> time feedback in the preview window is a game changer. It makes me much
> productive in certain tasks. For other people, not having to memorize
> syntax is the key feature.
> There are ways to combine the benefits of text syntax with the benefits I
> listed of the node+wire syntax. A "projectional editor" represents the
> program in memory, not as a character string, but as a syntax tree. As you
> edit the program, the syntax tree is modified, and the syntax tree is
> "projected" onto the display, possibly as text, or possibly using a
> graphical syntax, such as node+wire, or like BlocksCad. There are lots of
> text-based IDEs for conventional programming languages, which use this
> approach to provide assistance to the user, such as tab-completion of
> identifiers, auto-fill-in of function argument lists, and even sliders for
> tweaking numeric parameters. The GlslEditor supports sliders for live
> editing of GLSL shader programs (GLSL has a C-like text syntax).
> What I think would be really cool is a projectional editor that lets you
> switch back and forth between text syntax and graphical syntax. I'm looking
> around to see if someone has implemented this idea already.
> OpenSCAD mailing list
> Discuss at lists.openscad.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 297637 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Discuss