Resolved versus Unsuppressed?

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Anyone know of a hard & fast rule for which is used where?

The SW Help just confuses the issue.
If you look up Unsuppress, component in the index section, it shows an example which uses Resolve (R) to unsuppress a component state.
If you look up Resolve it uses Unsuppress



Why do we have/need both?


Helpful SW websites every user should be aware of faq559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions faq559-1091

 

[smcadman]

I think you use unsuppress to, well, unsuppress a suppressed component, assembly, feature, or mate. Whereas you use resolve to resolve lightweight components.

That was a little confusing, but resolve is for lightweight parts or assemblies.

Flores

 

[J-C]

Resolve is the term they have always used for assembly components, even before lightweight. I agree it is a bit confusing.

suppress/unsuppress: Features, even assy features and component patterns.
resolve/unsuppres: omponents in an assy.

Makes assy design tables a little confusing to work with, especially if you are controlling components and component patterns.

Jason

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Here's what I have so far

$STATE@(an assy cut) uses Unsuppress
$STATE@(a derived sketch pattern) uses Unsuppress
$STATE@(a feature) uses Unsuppress
$STATE@(a feature pattern) uses Unsuppress
$STATE@(a component pattern) uses Unsuppress
$STATE@(a part) uses Resolved
$STATE@(an assy) uses Resolved

I never use lightweight.

If you know of others please post & add to the list.


Helpful SW websites every user should be aware of faq559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions faq559-1091