Designer 2.007 Released

[RMarkey]

Changes from 2.006:

Removed a change that attempted to detect a non-closed vector loop as it is preventing some normal projects from uploading.

[bergerud]

Thank You. Weekend Saved!

[lynnfrwd]

Thank You. Weekend Saved!

You're telling me!

[SteveNelson46]

Something is awry with the sweep tools. In the lower screen the project is not there until you resize the window. Also, the vector lines disappear just like zan29's problem.

[bergerud]

Something is awry with the sweep tools. In the lower screen the project is not there until you resize the window. Also, the vector lines disappear just like zan29's problem.

I am not getting that behavior.

[SteveNelson46]

I am not getting that behavior.

I turned hardware acceleration back on and that fixed the problem.

[DickB]

So the bug that I had was due to a non-closed vector? Is that something I can detect and fix? I'm unclear on this. With 2.007, will my vector cut work? If not, what do I do to fix it?

[bergerud]

Good questions. I think we are into the weekend now. I doubt there will be any answers. When I got the error message with your mpc, I assumed it was a fix in response to your original problem. It may not have been. Even if it was, there was no instruction as to how to close the loop. In any case, 2.007 is a reversal, so I think the problem remains.

[RMarkey]

Its a very complex problem, not easily fixed. There was no 'fix' in 2.006, but it would try to detect when there was a problem. When the message pops up, you could move the object in question (the closed vector loop) by a little and the problem would usually go away. The problem is very rare, but it is present in the one file that you sent.

If you generate a file and the time estimate seems long, move the object (you can always undo), and try to upload again. If the time estimate is very different, then you may have generated the problem. You are shooting for the shortest time.

In your example, it doesn't take 35 minutes to cut a sawblade. It takes a lot less.

Like I said, the problem is very rare, maybe 1 in 10,000, any attempted fix would need at least 100,000 or more tests before it could even be considered.

[DickB]

Thanks for the response. I would like to pursue this a bit more offline via PM on Monday.