It is forbidden by the single solid rule now...
A randomly started discussion about the necessity of the PD single solid rule
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Read the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Be nice to others! Read the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Re: #4828 PartDesign: inverse for pocket
I have split the post as it went totally off topic.
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
Re: #4828 PartDesign: inverse for pocket
I can't understand too why a body must have only one part...
if the name "body" not matches very well, just let's change it...
if the name "body" not matches very well, just let's change it...
Re: #4828 PartDesign: inverse for pocket
@FBXL5 or @chrisb : is it possible to rename the first post topic title, that it give a meaningful name? Thanks in advance!
Greetings
user1234
Greetings
user1234
Re: #4828 PartDesign: inverse for pocket
FBXL5 should do it, it's his post.
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
Re: A randomly started discussion about the necessity of the PD single solid rule
I totally forgot that a half sentence of mine started all this. @chrisb split the thread and until his last post I didn't know that I have started this thread.
Re: A randomly started discussion about the necessity of the PD single solid rule
Although Adrian started being off topic, you were the first one being completely off.
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
Re: #4828 PartDesign: inverse for pocket
Pointless? Someone had a reason, at some point.
And, why is it a problem? It is simple enough to make multiple solids in Part workbench if that it is needed.
A bit of forethought is all it takes to design with the rule.
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan: Spock: "...His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking."