Unnecessary selection order

[legier]

I see that in many commands selection order is very important, but I also noticed that in some it should be completely redundant, but still wrong selection order generates rubbish. For example "panelBetween" command. It is simple math to compute where the panel should be created to fit between faces, but currently it is always created on the first selected face.

The other thing is all the XY, YX, XZ, ZX, YZ, ZY magic for "facePanel". I see the purpose of it, to be able to create panel whether base panel is in one or the other orientation, but yet it is again simple math to compute the orientation of the base face and then there would be no need for YX, ZX and ZY variants.

Would you be willing to fix that? I can also help with it because I have some experience with Python.

[dprojects]

Hi @legier

The "panel between" and "panel on face" tools were among the first tools in the Woodworking workbench. Panels created with these tools behaved unpredictably, which is partly where the name "magic" comes from. Personally, I rarely use these tools and even considered removing them to save space on the toolbar after creating the magicManager tool, which allows for creating panels in a more predictable manner. However, I ultimately decided to leave them in their "unpredictable form" for historical value and as a "quick shot" for those who use their specific behavior or "inaction" in some way.

I see that in many commands selection order is very important, but I also noticed that in some it should be completely redundant, but still wrong selection order generates rubbish. For example "panelBetween" command.

It is not only a matter of the wrong selection order, but also that Part::Box type objects, i.e. simple panels, have different vertices, edges and faces numbering than PartDesign type objects.

It is simple math to compute where the panel should be created to fit between faces, but currently it is always created on the first selected face.

Indeed. So you can choose where to create the panel. I am not sure if this is good idea to force the panel to be created always at the certain face. This may suppress some functionality.

The other thing is all the XY, YX, XZ, ZX, YZ, ZY magic for "facePanel". I see the purpose of it, to be able to create panel whether base panel is in one or the other orientation, but yet it is again simple math to compute the orientation of the base face and then there would be no need for YX, ZX and ZY variants.

I am not sure because there is no difference only if the panel is square and has equal edges. Otherwise, the longer side is along the other coordinate axis.

Would you be willing to fix that? I can also help with it because I have some experience with Python.

Regarding these tools, I plan to add support for veneer. This will allows to create panels with the spacing needed for the veneer. However, I don't know when I'll get around to it, as I still need to make a few cabinet modules and drill holes in M16 screws as a 3 mm drilling guide so I can drill pilot holes for 4 mm screws faster for next cabinet modules if I have 4 drilling guides at once.

[dprojects]

@legier

I've already drilled three screws. It went quickly, about two minutes per screw. Luckily, it is cold in Poland, little below 0 degrees Celsius, so I didn't need to cool down the drill bit and tools and I could drill at full speed. Interestingly, an HSS-G drill bit was enough. I didn't even need a cobalt HSS-Co drill bit for that.

I also need to cut off about 2 mm of the screws head to fit to the doweling jig, and it will be perfect.
With the additional 4 x 3 mm and 2 x 8 mm bushings, drilling pilot holes for cabinets will be a very fast.