moving objects with keeping one coordinate as is

[Krischu]

When I do a MV on selected objects one normally selects to reference point and then tha target point.

I can enter the target points ccordinates into the command line. When doing this, how can I say that e.g. X gets a new explicit value but Y keeps the coordinate (which I don't know by value at this moment). Something like

10; *

?

What is the placeholder for current ccordinate?

[Rantanplan7]

If you want to move Zero, you just have to put "0" in.

[wiekiera]

Hi Christoph,

Maybe the relative coordinates would do the job?
If you chose a reference point then you can type coordinates relative to your reference point.
Reference coordinates are preceded with @.

So if you chose 10,0 as your reference point and type @5,6 afterwards your object will move to point with absolute coordinates of 15,6.

Greetings,
Jakub

[Panchdara]

Hi Christoph,

A couple ways I think.

Using MV I don't think you can explicitly "anchor" any particular point, but only move the entity(ies) either to absolute reference point or to a relative reference point. Use @ in command line for a relative point, using 0 as X or Y to keep that axis same value. ie to shift entity 2 units along x-axis, use "@2,0" - likewise to move 2 units in y-axis use "@0,2". I think you got that sussed.

Now for the interesting bit (I'm going to use a simple line as an example):
Say you want to move one point 2 units along the x-axis, but keep the other point fixed.
1) Select the point you wish to move (not the line, but the point) and move it somewhere, just a smidge for instance.
2) Let the left mouse button off. Command line says "Target point of reference point". Press SPACE to enter command line.
3) Enter either absolute or relative target point (can also use polar coords I think) - in this case @2,0. Press ENTER
4) New line extended/altered/shortened with anchored point(s)

I think the MV moves the entire entity(ies), not just a point?

Best

edit: I hope I've not gone off on an unnecessary tangent... (pun intended )

[CVH]

Panchdara,
The command line is indeed the best practice with single inputs.
MV is great in moving items in a set.

Relative and absolute don't mix.
No relative move to an absolute restricted position, there is nothing as a fixed value placeholder that I know of.

Relative Polar works similar: 5 to the right = @5<0 ; 5 up = @5<90 and easier angled.
And no, Polar doesn't mix with Cartesian. (a topic that passed by a while ago)

Another way would be locking your relative and use an othogonal snapping restiction.
On the other hand:
10, 0, 5, 6, 15, 2 ... in any case is using the grid quicker.

Use MV with any grid reference and use an ALT snapped grid reference to move along one axis.
Those reference can mean something in the design but one could use refs that are way out there.

Another way would be to duplicate and edit only the X or the Y property to a new one.
Edit it to a formula to move relative, use a fixed value when needed.
Or the same for some entities grouped in a block and exploded afterwards.
Or simply use blocks for duplicates.

Try out a horizontal or vertical or slanted auxiliary that crosses your work at a specific place.
Now the intersection can be a reference and the auxiliary a direction that can cross something else.
No odd numbers for offsets are needed. Move selected From ... To ... 'as is'. Wipe auxiliaries.

It all depends on what one would like to achieve

Regards,
CVH

[Panchdara]

Panchdara,
The command line is indeed the best practice with single inputs.
MV is great in moving items in a set.

And I quote what I stated above:
"Using MV I don't think you can explicitly "anchor" any particular point, but only move the entity(ies) either to absolute reference point or to a relative reference point."
and
"I think the MV moves the entire entity(ies), not just a point?"

entity(ies) == "set"

I was only trying to figure a way to help give an avenue to the solution that Christoph asked. I'm not sure where the came from.

"... there is nothing as a fixed value placeholder that I know of" you stated makes sense. Thank you, I am certainly not aware of that, but I had thought of it. Like in a spreadsheet using $x$y or x$y or $xy...

Anyway, after 2nd paragraph you lost me. I shall dissect and figure out.

Your posts have been very useful.

Best