playing with macros

[jschraud228486]

Trying to create a custom button that will preform the following with one click
-purge all, then zoom extent,save, turn layer to 0.

[clshade]

Can you type what you want from the Command line and have it do what you need?
If so then the keystrokes can be made a Macro.

^C^C-Purge;All;*;No;Zoom;Extents;LA;Set;0;;
or
^C^C-Purge;A;*;N;Z;E;LA;S;0;;

[BlackBox]

Can you type what you want from the Command line and have it do what you need?
If so then the keystrokes can be made a Macro.

^C^C-Purge;All;*;No;Zoom;Extents;LA;Set;0;;
or
^C^C-Purge;A;*;N;Z;E;LA;S;0;;

If memory serves, LA is the built-in keyboard shortcut for the LAYER Command, and not the -LAYER Command as is needed for this particular macro.

Also, as I need for my customizations to support multiple versions, I tend to 'spell out' the command options to avoid issues as discussed here.

HTH

[clshade]

Worked here

[BlackBox]

Worked here

... That's my point.

Instead of only working for you, and anyone whom already has their PGP define LA as the -LAYER Command, etc. perhaps it would be prudent to post a macro that specifies the ._-LAYER Command. My $0.02

[clshade]

I thought that LA was the common OOTB alias for Layer?
I've never changed the pgp or any alias's for that matter.

Though I think your input is worth at least a nickle maybe $0.06

[BlackBox]

I thought that LA was the common OOTB alias for Layer?
I've never changed the pgp or any alias's for that matter.

Perhaps I was unclear....

OOTB the LA keyboard shortcut invokes the LAYER Command (the dialog version), and not the -LAYER Command (the command line version).

If one user has LA defined OOTB (i.e., the LAYER Command), and another has LA defined (either by acad.pgp, LISP, CUIx, etc.) as the -LAYER Command, then the same macro will yield different results.

Also worthy of note, is that one's LAYERDLGMODE System Variable setting may also yield difference results.

By explicitly specifying -LAYER within the macro, you achieve standardization, without being affected by the user's customizations... Not that you have to, it's just a good way of avoiding potential complications (win-win).

Were I to incorporate a similar macro in our setup, I'd have used:

pseudo macro:

^C^C._-purge all * no ._zoom extents ._-layer set 0

... Or, my preference is to use LISP for it's *error* handling, but this request is for someone using LT, so I digress.

Also, for those that have full versions (i.e., LISP enabled), you might consider using SETVAR in lieu of the -LAYER Command:

(setvar 'clayer "0")

Though I think your input is worth at least a nickle maybe $0.06

That is very kind of you to say, clshade.

[clshade]

Yep, way beyond the details I've ever gotten into.
I've never been too sure about starting (using) the Command with ._- I know this helps translate the Macro for other languages but that is about it.

Excellent information for more than just a passing shot at this Macro

Now that I've used it I think I'll add it to my setup.
I do tend to finish drawings this way and it sure is simple.
Need to add OVERKILL (LT 2013) and AUDIT to it
OVERKILL-AUDIT-PURGE

[pendean]

If we want to write Macros correctly, we should all go all the way instead of partially correcting each other:
^C^C._-purge;_all;*;_no;._-purge;_regapps;*;_no;._zoom;_extents;._-layer;_set;0;;

Leaving blanks for <enter> is never good coding 'best' practice IMHO.

[jaberwok]

If we want to write Macros correctly, we should all go all the way instead of partially correcting each other:
^C^C._-purge;_all;*;_no;._-purge;_regapps;*;_no;._zoom;_extents;._-layer;_set;0;;

Leaving blanks for <enter> is never good coding 'best' practice IMHO.

+ 1