3 ms·

I don't see the point, all this software is meant to run on *nix. Also OpenSCAD sucks. I tried it, made a few things, it's objectively a worse way to do paramet

I don't see the point, all this software is meant to run on *nix. Also OpenSCAD sucks. I tried it, made a few things, it's objectively a worse way to do parametric modeling and lacks some really basic features like fillets. FreeCAD has been p great OTOH, and has baked in support for OpenSCAD scripts, if you really need that. If you are not allergic to the cloud or proprietary solutions, Onshape is a very good tool with it's own set of annoying things.

serf 3y ago
openSCAD doesn't suck, it's just an entirely different paradigm than something like FreeCAD or onshape. as for your complaint about fillets, there are plenty of openSCAD libraries to assist in the task. using libraries within openscad is pretty routine. if you're designing stuff like gears/propellers/bolts/nuts/threads/pins, a purely parametric solution is fantastic. That said, I would never tell someone to go try to design their paper-towel holder or dish-rack with it or prototype a robot with it. As with much of design, picking the right tool for the job is a large portion of the battle.
- juliangmp 3y ago
  I have to agree that openscad kinda sucks, in some regards. Sorry but fillets and chamfers aren't features that should be complicated, they are basics. And if using libraries is pretty routine, why does library management boil down to "just download some scripts and throw them into some directory". Even python does this better. Openscad is a text/programming based cad, but it doesn't fully leverage the advantages that come with that. A proper package manager, good linting, etc. are all absent. It feels unfinished and outdated in many regards. I want to like openscad and I have made a bunch of models with it. But all in all I can't bring myself to do so.
regularfry 3y ago
> I don't see the point, all this software is meant to run on nix. I do, "meant to" and "actually does" can be miles* apart. > Also OpenSCAD sucks Counterpoint: no it doesn't.
kamranjon 3y ago
Honestly I’ve been using blender to make precision parts to be 3d printed for years now, and while it doesn’t have all of the shortcuts of something like onshape, with a digital caliper and proper scale settings you can make basically anything you want. It also has a new plug-in called cad sketcher: https://www.cadsketcher.com/ https://www.cadsketcher.com/ for filling in some of those gaps.
nathan_f77 3y ago
Thanks for the tip about FreeCAD. I actually love OpenSCAD and have developed a really nice workflow in VS Code using some extensions (format on save, live preview, GitHub Copilot, etc.), but I would still like to learn some other tools as well. It looks like FreeCAD can do some really advanced things.
- Hamcha 3y ago
  I have no experience with it yet but I have build123d[1] in my list of stuff to check out, it's basically OpenSCAD but in python and it seems quite more powerful (plus, fillets/chamfers/etc are built-in). It also seems to have VSCode integration through OCP CAD Viewer. 1. https://github.com/gumyr/build123d https://github.com/gumyr/build123d
  - skinner927 3y ago
    Oh wow this looks promising!
bsza 3y ago
Last time I checked (~3 years ago) FreeCAD was riddled with bugs. You make the slightest change to a constraint, everything that depends on it breaks. Degrees of freedom are calculated incorrectly. Multiple times I saved and reopened a file only to see my work get completely destroyed, with all my constraints throwing errors, and a quick search confirms I’m not alone with that problem. [0] OpenSCAD might not have all the bells and whistles you’d expect from a WYSIWYG editor, but at least it doesn’t fubar hours of your work. As usual, formats you can edit with a text editor are the most robust. It is definitely not an “objectively worse way to do parametric modeling”. [0] https://forum.freecad.org/viewtopic.php?t=38574 https://forum.freecad.org/viewtopic.php?t=38574
- hospitalJail 3y ago
  FreeCAD is great today IMO. If you want to avoid the topological naming problem(something that can be avoided with a 10-20 minute youtube video on the topic), try RealThunder's fork.
- terribleperson 3y ago
  In OpenSCAD, you primarily model by creating shapes and combining them with boolean operations. You can use this same workflow in FreeCAD without using the sometimes-fragile PartDesign workbench - that's what the Part workbench is. You could, if you were so inclined, even do it in text using Python. This approach doesn't usually explode on you. However, the PartDesign workbench is substantially more capable and more comparable to other CAD programs, and a substantial portion of the dev work on FreeCAD has been targeted at making it less fragile. You can also avoid most breakages in PartDesign by following best practices that can be found on YouTube or the FreeCAD wiki. A continuing issue is constraint-related issues which you mentioned. I've never seen a file explode after save and load - if that happened, it's likely it was already broken before save and FreeCAD failed to inform you, which I have definitely seen. What I have seen is a similar problem where a sketch is valid, but there are one or more alternative valid configuration under the same constraints. Everything is fine and the file is usable as long until you try to adjust certain parameters driving a sketch and the sketch flips into a totally different configuration. Even after reverting to old parameters, the sketch will be now be stuck in this new configuration and everything built on it will be broke. This is usually avoidable, but it requires seriously thinking about how you're constraining your sketch to avoid this kind of fragility. It's also important to know that you can combine workbenches. A solid created in the Part workbench can be imported into the PartDesign workbench as a base feature. A PartDesign solid can be used in Part boolean operations. This is all to say that while FreeCAD definitely has a much steeper learning curve than OpenSCAD, it can generally do the same things as OpenSCAD without any Sketch/PartDesign-related fragility while having many additional capabilities available if you need them.

serf 3y ago

openSCAD doesn't suck, it's just an entirely different paradigm than something like FreeCAD or onshape. as for your complaint about fillets, there are plenty of openSCAD libraries to assist in the task. using libraries within openscad is pretty routine. if you're designing stuff like gears/propellers/bolts/nuts/threads/pins, a purely parametric solution is fantastic. That said, I would never tell someone to go try to design their paper-towel holder or dish-rack with it or prototype a robot with it. As with much of design, picking the right tool for the job is a large portion of the battle.

juliangmp 3y ago
I have to agree that openscad kinda sucks, in some regards. Sorry but fillets and chamfers aren't features that should be complicated, they are basics. And if using libraries is pretty routine, why does library management boil down to "just download some scripts and throw them into some directory". Even python does this better. Openscad is a text/programming based cad, but it doesn't fully leverage the advantages that come with that. A proper package manager, good linting, etc. are all absent. It feels unfinished and outdated in many regards. I want to like openscad and I have made a bunch of models with it. But all in all I can't bring myself to do so.

regularfry 3y ago

> I don't see the point, all this software is meant to run on nix. I do, "meant to" and "actually does" can be miles* apart. > Also OpenSCAD sucks Counterpoint: no it doesn't.

kamranjon 3y ago

Honestly I’ve been using blender to make precision parts to be 3d printed for years now, and while it doesn’t have all of the shortcuts of something like onshape, with a digital caliper and proper scale settings you can make basically anything you want. It also has a new plug-in called cad sketcher: https://www.cadsketcher.com/ https://www.cadsketcher.com/ for filling in some of those gaps.

nathan_f77 3y ago

Thanks for the tip about FreeCAD. I actually love OpenSCAD and have developed a really nice workflow in VS Code using some extensions (format on save, live preview, GitHub Copilot, etc.), but I would still like to learn some other tools as well. It looks like FreeCAD can do some really advanced things.

Hamcha 3y ago
I have no experience with it yet but I have build123d[1] in my list of stuff to check out, it's basically OpenSCAD but in python and it seems quite more powerful (plus, fillets/chamfers/etc are built-in). It also seems to have VSCode integration through OCP CAD Viewer. 1. https://github.com/gumyr/build123d https://github.com/gumyr/build123d
- skinner927 3y ago
  Oh wow this looks promising!

bsza 3y ago

Last time I checked (~3 years ago) FreeCAD was riddled with bugs. You make the slightest change to a constraint, everything that depends on it breaks. Degrees of freedom are calculated incorrectly. Multiple times I saved and reopened a file only to see my work get completely destroyed, with all my constraints throwing errors, and a quick search confirms I’m not alone with that problem. [0] OpenSCAD might not have all the bells and whistles you’d expect from a WYSIWYG editor, but at least it doesn’t fubar hours of your work. As usual, formats you can edit with a text editor are the most robust. It is definitely not an “objectively worse way to do parametric modeling”. [0] https://forum.freecad.org/viewtopic.php?t=38574 https://forum.freecad.org/viewtopic.php?t=38574

hospitalJail 3y ago
FreeCAD is great today IMO. If you want to avoid the topological naming problem(something that can be avoided with a 10-20 minute youtube video on the topic), try RealThunder's fork.
terribleperson 3y ago
In OpenSCAD, you primarily model by creating shapes and combining them with boolean operations. You can use this same workflow in FreeCAD without using the sometimes-fragile PartDesign workbench - that's what the Part workbench is. You could, if you were so inclined, even do it in text using Python. This approach doesn't usually explode on you. However, the PartDesign workbench is substantially more capable and more comparable to other CAD programs, and a substantial portion of the dev work on FreeCAD has been targeted at making it less fragile. You can also avoid most breakages in PartDesign by following best practices that can be found on YouTube or the FreeCAD wiki. A continuing issue is constraint-related issues which you mentioned. I've never seen a file explode after save and load - if that happened, it's likely it was already broken before save and FreeCAD failed to inform you, which I have definitely seen. What I have seen is a similar problem where a sketch is valid, but there are one or more alternative valid configuration under the same constraints. Everything is fine and the file is usable as long until you try to adjust certain parameters driving a sketch and the sketch flips into a totally different configuration. Even after reverting to old parameters, the sketch will be now be stuck in this new configuration and everything built on it will be broke. This is usually avoidable, but it requires seriously thinking about how you're constraining your sketch to avoid this kind of fragility. It's also important to know that you can combine workbenches. A solid created in the Part workbench can be imported into the PartDesign workbench as a base feature. A PartDesign solid can be used in Part boolean operations. This is all to say that while FreeCAD definitely has a much steeper learning curve than OpenSCAD, it can generally do the same things as OpenSCAD without any Sketch/PartDesign-related fragility while having many additional capabilities available if you need them.