Topic: Anyone have example for changing z elevation of polyline?

[bchapman]

lol... thanks! I'll have to keep improving but don't have too much heart burn over it... I'm happy I just get the thing workin' as it is lol

WTF is this ??

looks like you have a displaced code block.

... and ( haven't analysed, so assume you use a break to escape this ) while true would be a more usual conditional.

Code: [Select]

            double BCCADJVALUE = BCCADJUSTMENT.Value;
                                                                                               
            {

                while (0 == 0)
                    try
                    {




[BlackBox]

thanks Kerry!... not sure who I jumped on but I didn't mean to... I appreciate the advice

The object browser helped a ton, but nothing I went through on Autodesk site even mentioned it.  Major fail :/ 

Look at the title bar at the top of your IDE.

Does it say "Autodesk Visual Studio", or does it say Microsoft Visual Studio ?

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/beginner/default.aspx

In an effort to build on Tony's excellent point (if I may)... I think you're (BC) overlooking development concepts generally with what I presume to be unintentional 'Autodesk blinders' on. This is unfortunately very common when stepping up from LISP to .NET API.

Given Object Oriented development as a whole, despite growing with each release, the Autodesk .NET API is a very tiny, perhaps minuscule, arena of the former.

If your goal is to become a capable AutoCAD .NET developer, then it is an essential, yet implied task, that you (first?) become a capable .NET developer (i.e., Console, Windows Forms, WPF Browser Applications, etc. to list a few), as while not explicitly stated in all beginner AutoCAD .NET materials, it can easily be considered to be a prerequisite... Particularly as you spill over into more complex tasks, and frameworks.

There are many free resources out there (some of which are available directly from Visual Studio's Start Page), but if you'd like to find a book to read, and re-read again, I found Andrew Troelsen's Pro C# 2010 and the .NET 4 Platform to be useful... All +1700 pages of it.


Andrew's Pro C# 5.0 and the .NET 4.5 Platform is also available for those who may be interested... Perhaps for the 2014 product line? *not sure*

... [NDA Censorship]

[TheMaster]

Thanks TT... man you guys are ruthless... no mercy I suppose.... seems a culture of condemnation in the programmers world...

Well, there may be a few here with something to prove, that might serve as motivation for giving you free training and tutoring on something that you barely understand, but unfortunately, I'm not one of them.

The reason that you're wearing out your welcome so quickly, and the reason you characterize some here as being part of a 'culture of condemnation', is because you are here trying to get spoon-fed, what most of us had to get through a lot of hard work, self-learning, paid-for-learning, and more generally, making the personal effort to learn to walk before trying to run, and did that without burdening others in an online discussion group with what amounts to free training.

[dgorsman]

Thanks TT... man you guys are ruthless... no mercy I suppose.... seems a culture of condemnation in the programmers world...

This is the friendly end of the pool.  In the more... "dedicated" ... recesses of the online programming community you would be *vigorously* ripped a new one for not doing the initial leg work.  Part of it stems from the experience of inheriting somebody elses code which came from similar starting points and now doesn't work, requring serious analysis and/or a full re-write while execs are breathing down your neck.

If you aren't familiar with it, look up "RTFM".

[BlackBox]

... For the 'visual learners':

If you aren't familiar with it, look up "RTFM".

[bchapman]

Understood...learned all on your own... no help... I'll leave ya be. Feel free not to "spoon feed" as you see fit.

Thanks TT... man you guys are ruthless... no mercy I suppose.... seems a culture of condemnation in the programmers world...

Well, there may be a few here with something to prove, that might serve as motivation for giving you free training and tutoring on something that you barely understand, but unfortunately, I'm not one of them.

The reason that you're wearing out your welcome so quickly, and the reason you characterize some here as being part of a 'culture of condemnation', is because you are here trying to get spoon-fed, what most of us had to get through a lot of hard work, self-learning, paid-for-learning, and more generally, making the personal effort to learn to walk before trying to run, and did that without burdening others in an online discussion group with what amounts to free training.

[bchapman]

Thanks Renderman

... For the 'visual learners':

If you aren't familiar with it, look up "RTFM".

[bchapman]

lol... feel bad for you guys

Thanks TT... man you guys are ruthless... no mercy I suppose.... seems a culture of condemnation in the programmers world...

This is the friendly end of the pool.  In the more... "dedicated" ... recesses of the online programming community you would be *vigorously* ripped a new one for not doing the initial leg work.  Part of it stems from the experience of inheriting somebody elses code which came from similar starting points and now doesn't work, requring serious analysis and/or a full re-write while execs are breathing down your neck.

If you aren't familiar with it, look up "RTFM".

[bchapman]

Thanks Renderman... as always... full of helpful info... I've downloaded tons of material. Should help

thanks Kerry!... not sure who I jumped on but I didn't mean to... I appreciate the advice

The object browser helped a ton, but nothing I went through on Autodesk site even mentioned it.  Major fail :/ 

Look at the title bar at the top of your IDE.

Does it say "Autodesk Visual Studio", or does it say Microsoft Visual Studio ?

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/beginner/default.aspx

In an effort to build on Tony's excellent point (if I may)... I think you're (BC) overlooking development concepts generally with what I presume to be unintentional 'Autodesk blinders' on. This is unfortunately very common when stepping up from LISP to .NET API.

Given Object Oriented development as a whole, despite growing with each release, the Autodesk .NET API is a very tiny, perhaps minuscule, arena of the former.

If your goal is to become a capable AutoCAD .NET developer, then it is an essential, yet implied task, that you (first?) become a capable .NET developer (i.e., Console, Windows Forms, WPF Browser Applications, etc. to list a few), as while not explicitly stated in all beginner AutoCAD .NET materials, it can easily be considered to be a prerequisite... Particularly as you spill over into more complex tasks, and frameworks.

There are many free resources out there (some of which are available directly from Visual Studio's Start Page), but if you'd like to find a book to read, and re-read again, I found Andrew Troelsen's Pro C# 2010 and the .NET 4 Platform to be useful... All +1700 pages of it.


Andrew's Pro C# 5.0 and the .NET 4.5 Platform is also available for those who may be interested... Perhaps for the 2014 product line? *not sure*

... [NDA Censorship]

[BlackBox]

BC, I think you're taking this as some sort of personal attack, when in fact it is not... Especially among the programming kind, members tend to speak very matter-of-fact.

I just started the ascension from LISP to .NET myself recently... I may have an aptitude for development, but I could not have come as far as I have in (what I consider to be) such a short time-frame _without_ the help of others on this, and other forums alike (this one's the best though - giggity). That is why I strive to give back, where I feel it may be of use to others.

You're just starting to climb the proverbial mountain... Immerse yourself in the .NET documentation, tutorials, read related threads to help you troubleshoot, etc.. and for the love of all that is good, code, code, and code some more.

Methinks, it's the only way _you're_ going to learn (not just you, but anyone in this situation)... When you get stuck (and you will), post a clear, descriptive post, and don't forget to include some code (pseudo code is fine).

While I cannot speak for others, if my limited experience is any indicator, I'd bet a hot dollar that any one of the members you think is blasting you now (provided you follow the aforementioned suggestions), would gladly help to point you in the right direction. Just my $0.02.

[Kerry]

aw, gee, I hate it when that happens!.

[TheMaster]

BC, I think you're taking this as some sort of personal attack, when in fact it is not... Especially among the programming kind, members tend to speak very matter-of-fact.

I just started the ascension from LISP to .NET myself recently... I may have an aptitude for development, but I could not have come as far as I have in (what I consider to be) such a short time-frame _without_ the help of others on this, and other forums alike (this one's the best though - giggity). That is why I strive to give back, where I feel it may be of use to others.

You're just starting to climb the proverbial mountain... Immerse yourself in the .NET documentation, tutorials, read related threads to help you troubleshoot, etc.. and for the love of all that is good, code, code, and code some more.

Methinks, it's the only way _you're_ going to learn (not just you, but anyone in this situation)... When you get stuck (and you will), post a clear, descriptive post, and don't forget to include some code (pseudo code is fine).

While I cannot speak for others, if my limited experience is any indicator, I'd bet a hot dollar that any one of the members you think is blasting you now (provided you follow the aforementioned suggestions), would gladly help to point you in the right direction. Just my $0.02.

The reason I have a bad reaction to people who are complete noobs, and are expecting to be able to do what requires a good years worth of learning and practice, is because we generally communicate with others with an assumption that the other person can understand what is being written, the terms we use in what we write, etc., and that terms that most of us may take for granted as being understood, are not understood by a total noob.

So, to explain things to the noob, you have recursively explain things in your explaination, distilled down to terms they can understand, which means you have to write a #$%^ book for them, and in some cases, they seem to be expecting nothing less than that.

[Kerry]

< .. >

I can't argue with that ...

 and the subject IS a huge one to learn, and even re-learn when you've been away for a while. 

[BlackBox]

The reason I have a bad reaction to people who are complete noobs, and are expecting to be able to do what requires a good years worth of learning and practice, is because we generally communicate with others with an assumption that the other person can understand what is being written, the terms we use in what we write, etc., and that terms that most of us may take for granted as being understood, are not understood by a total noob.

So, to explain things to the noob, you have recursively explain things in your explaination, distilled down to terms they can understand, which means you have to write a #$%^ book for them, and in some cases, they seem to be expecting nothing less than that.

I am unsure if you felt that my response was in any way directed at you, Tony... Regardless, I don't believe a reasonable person would take issue with the sentiment you conveyed here.

This is a public forum, made up of volunteer members who kindly donate their time, effort, knowledge, and often wisdom... Something that is to be respected from the outset, each time one chooses to become the question-asker.

[TheMaster]

The reason I have a bad reaction to people who are complete noobs, and are expecting to be able to do what requires a good years worth of learning and practice, is because we generally communicate with others with an assumption that the other person can understand what is being written, the terms we use in what we write, etc., and that terms that most of us may take for granted as being understood, are not understood by a total noob.

So, to explain things to the noob, you have recursively explain things in your explaination, distilled down to terms they can understand, which means you have to write a #$%^ book for them, and in some cases, they seem to be expecting nothing less than that.

I am unsure if you felt that my response was in any way directed at you, Tony... Regardless, I don't believe a reasonable person would take issue with the sentiment you conveyed here.

This is a public forum, made up of volunteer members who kindly donate their time, effort, knowledge, and often wisdom... Something that is to be respected from the outset, each time one chooses to become the question-asker.

RenderMan, no, I just replied to the last post, nothing about it that I took issue with.

I just wanted to clarify my position.