UNDO Isn't alway available

[BobCondra]

CREO 2.0 M020.

I don't know all of the conditions, but it seems like there are less opportunities to UNDO in CREO 2.0 as there was in WF 5.0. I just ran into an example today - I had a chamfer that I edited the attachment from one of the chamfers in the selection to the other (2 chamfers in one feature), and then re-positioned the text. It was not possible to 'UNDO' this to move the text back, and attach the chamfer to the other selection. I could have sworn I could do this in 5.0.

It seems like there are other situations where this has happened as well. Anyone else have this happen to them or notice it? Is there a setting that will allow more undo's??

Bob Condra

This thread is inactive and closed by the PTC Community Management Team. If you would like to provide a reply and re-open this thread, please notify the moderator and reference the thread. You may also use "Start a topic" button to ask a new question. Please be sure to include what version of the PTC product you are using so another community member knowledgeable about your version may be able to assist.

[jbennett]

You can try to change the default undo stack limit in your Config, but this has been as issue with every release. The default limit is set at 50. This might not help you with the example you set up but might give you more of a chance with other undo's.
general_undo_stack_limit - default 50


John Bennett
Cad Business Administrator
(801)513-9001

[jbennett]

Here is a list of the other undo config options you can try when trying to deal with undo issues.

ENABLE_BBL_UNDO (hidden)
ENABLE_UNDO_FOR_ON_DEMAND (hidden)
GENERAL_UNDO_STACK_LIMIT
SKETCHER_UNDO (hidden)
SKETCHER_UNDO_REORIENT_VIEW
SKETCHER_UNDO_STACK_LIMIT

John Bennett
Cad Business Administrator
(801)513-9001

[amedina]

That's funny. In Ms word and blender.org and gimp.org and ooo.org and much
of the rest of the software world you can un-do on anything. I suspect they
wrote themselves into a software corner 🙂

yeah I can imagine my self setting config files for MS word to prevent it
from crashing because someone did not do their job at automating the fix.

like:
UNDO_AFTER_PERIOD NO
UNDO_AFTER_PROPER_NAME_DETECTION YES
UNDO_ALLOWED_BEFORE_CRASH NO
STUPID_CLIPPY_NO_UNDO_DISPLAY YES
ALLOW_POP_UPS_ON_IE YES-ALL-SEND_MY_PERSONAL_INFO_TOO

mICRO sOFT already knows how to get my personal info, how to show me clippy
with unnecesary information, how to crash with no warning and how to
correct my grammar unnecesarily too. I think PTC should be able to tell
when and how to do an un-do.

hey Solid Works and Nx can do it. I kinda like how NX relates all their
assembly constraints to the assembly so you can just shuffle parts around.
I wonder how they do cables. I guess its greener on the other side. but its
also priced differently.

[JonathanHodgson]

Yeah, PTC were pretty late to the party with an Undo function.



Plus it always seems to be that the more critical the operation, the
less likely Undo is to be available. You can always undo moving a
drawing view...



Jonathan

[wfalco]

Perhaps the logic is: The software is so good you don't need no stinkin'
undo. Ba ha ha.

[LawrenceS]

I am not sure if this email string makes me want to laugh, or cry.

"PTC was Late to the Undo function?"They are still late as the still don't have it!I cannot figure out why PTC still does not see undo as a worthwhile function to add...

Maybe PTC will make it a module, Pro-Undo...Or rather, Creo-Undo

Lawrence

In Reply to Jonathan Hodgson:

Yeah, PTC were pretty late to the party with an Undo function.

Plus it always seems to be that the more critical the operation, the
less likely Undo is to be available. You can always undo moving a
drawing view...

Jonathan

[amedina]

example of when you want undo:

Like when some guy creates a wire and follows PTC's tutorials and thinks he
is a genius because the cable updates every time the assembly changes...so
does the released drawing but he ignores that. Then one day three years
later you come in and move the assembly and the bend radius gets violated..
Then you would want undo. Iike if you had an developer on your side, just
sitting there, would't you turn to him and say "look all my assembly is
failing right before my eyes!, why won't you give me an undo button?" plus
some profane additions to make it a more colloquial situation. yeah Undo
should be less click than redefine each cable location, each of 200 cable
locations until you finally see the OK window. the config.pro option
"freeze failed components yes", sounds cool, just don't give it to your
lesser users, it will run your life. Undo is the better way to go.


On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Lawrence Scheeler <lawrences@hydraforce.com<br/>> wrote:

> I am not sure if this email string makes me want to laugh, or cry.
>
> "PTC *was* Late to the Undo function?" They are still late as the still
> don't have it! I cannot figure out why PTC still does not see undo as a
> worthwhile function to add...
>
> Maybe PTC will make it a module, Pro-Undo...Or rather, Creo-Undo
>
> Lawrence
>
> In Reply to Jonathan Hodgson:
>
> Yeah, PTC were pretty late to the party with an Undo function.
>
> Plus it always seems to be that the more critical the operation, the
> less likely Undo is to be available. You can always undo moving a
> drawing view...
>
>
> Jonathan
>

[DamianCastillo]

I don't pretend to know the reason behind the limited ability to undo in Pro/E or Creo. Sometimes I have to step back and think about the code or complexity of the process.

Gimp, Photoshop, Word and many other type of software are much simpler to undo your past actions because they are not related, linked or parametrically attached to other objects like in a Parametric modeler.

Yes it's probably true that PTC has difficulty with this due to the original code but the undo process would be much more involved in a 3D parametric modeler than it would be for word or gimp.

What we need to compare it too is similar software such as SolidWorks or Inventor. Does anyone know if SolidWorks allows you to undo 100% of every feature or object type? If the answer is yes, then it's obvious that the complex code behind the Granite kernel is the problem. SolidWorks and Inventor were designed for Windows while Pro/E started with Unix code and was later changed to adopt Windows. This could be part of the problem. Then again, maybe I am totally wrong on this.

"Too many people walk around like Clark Kent, because they don't realize they can Fly like Superman"

[kimndave9]

A frustration I've had with all undo/redo systems is that even when the
changes are independent, I can't skip one or more on the way to the
change I want to undo. In most word-processors, if I accidentally change
a font and then do a lot of typing, I can't undo just the font change.
In fact, I can't even see what the specific change (was->now).

The way many forms of un-do work is to keep a copy of a portion of, or
the entirety of, a structure. All un-do has to do then is void the
current version and point to the previous one. PhotoShop seems to keep
copies of entire layers and so soaks up memory pretty fast. Word seems
to track by paragraph - in the past a technique called Quick Saves would
append only the changed items to the end of the on-disk file, saving the
floppy drive wear and time from having to redo the entire file on each
save. Excel does one operation at a time, but can't undo macro/VBA
performed changes.

If Pro/E Creo whatever (PCW) was a history based modeler (misconception)
all one would have to do is roll back the history stack and re-run
(regenerate.) Certainly there is nothing in there that can't be un-done
if the operation is recorded. Add a Layer -> Delete a Layer, for example.

However, PCW doesn't retain the whole history of the operations. An
operation is adding or deleting a feature, or modifying a value. The
features and the order they are in makes up the procedure that PCW uses
to regenerate the model. That's what makes PCW a procedural parametric
modeler.

I think it doesn't have so much to do with the kernal. AFAIK the kernal
takes unit operations and an existing (empty to start) data-storage and
modifies the data-storage based on the operations. Add a protrusion +
Sketch geometry -> surface, edge, vertex description. Make a cut -> new
surface, edge, vertex description.

One difficulty is coming up with scheme that operates across all the
operations, or enough to be helpful. Another is dealing with situations
like: a change to a part dimension is made in an assembly and then the
part alone is saved - what should un-do in the assembly un-do?

Here's one suggestion about undo-redo from Dr. Dobb's

[DamianCastillo]

Good points David.

I really don't know what the challenge is but I was just thinking the process is more involved or complicated with Pro/E or Creo than it would be with something like Word.

Can SolidWorks undo without issues or is it similar experience as Creo?

"Too many people walk around like Clark Kent, because they don't realize they can Fly like Superman"

[BobCondra]

One thing I have not heard back from anyone yet is if undo seemed to work better on WF5 vs CREO. Was I just imagining this or was it a reality?


Regards,

Bob

[ptc-1932745]

I can comment on UNDO and REDO somewhat in SW 2012/2013. According to
my info, UNDO and REDO can be done for most operations but is not
perfect.



I don't use it much, but I understand you cannot redo assembly mates
after undoing, and there are other, possibly quirky reasons you can't
undo and redo to your heart's content. I understand that you can undo
and redo most in sketcher, and possibly least in assembly mode.





Christopher F. Gosnell



FPD Company

124 Hidden Valley Road

McMurray, PA 15317

[magnus.salomons]

In Reply to Damian Castillo:

Good points David.

I really don't know what the challenge is but I was just thinking the process is more involved or complicated with Pro/E or Creo than it would be with something like Word.

Can SolidWorks undo without issues or is it similar experience as Creo?

"Too many people walk around like Clark Kent, because they don't realize they can Fly like Superman"

Here's one example I posted on MCAD Central a year ago. I have not checked if it's improved in the later versions of SW.

"Mindripper, there are many areas in SW where the Undo doesn't work and I believe I read on Mike Puckets blog that SW users weren't happy at all about the Undo command.

Here's one comparison between SW vs Creo. It's the same funcionality in WF5. I don't know how many versions this goes back in WF.

SW2010 where the Undo is greyed out and you can't undo or redo geometry selections.

Creo 1.0 where you can Undo or Redo geometry selections within a command."

[amedina]

PTC's RSD has undo for all the things I tried last week. Siemens NX has
undo for all the stuff I tried too. On NX I was working with assembly/part
and drawing so I know I covered the basic stuff. Probably if I dig deeper I
will find undo issues. RSD is just a 2D software so yeah, as expected undo
works well. So I wonder if there are distinct rules of what makes
something undo-able. I can image setting some sort of state where you save
the state each minute and then you can revert to that. Auto save has not
been that great. It only has on or off, no selective option. Maybe there
could be -I'm patenting this- a save state button. The
user preemptively knows that the following action could result in an
un-doable state, so he clicks the save current state or scs button. This
will keep that state and if creo gets a failure, it will simply revert back
and then explain why. Forget it, PTC you can have it, go ahead, no
royalties.

[iceblink1]

Sounds very similar to the "save" button?