> What would you suggest? Complaining is easy.
What are the complaints about OpenSCAD? If it's the language itself, then there's some similar projects using Racket[0] and JavaScript[1] respectively.
[0]: https://docs.racket-lang.org/ruckus/Ruckus_Language_Referenc...
I don't think there's a Python version, unless you count using Ruckus via Python on Racket[0].
> lack of immediate feedback
When "Automatic Reload and Preview" is enabled, OpenSCAD re-renders the shape whenever the text file is saved, so there's hardly any time delay, although there is arguably a spacial remoteness due to the text being separate from the shape.
> along with the fact that it's more verbose than the point-and-click interface of Fusion.
I personally find it difficult manipulating 3D objects by with a 2D cursor. I've spent a fair amount of time on the point-and-click editor in Blender, and I find it less confusing to have a textual expression of the shapes at hand.
Perhaps the one (possibly accidental) killer-feature about OpenSCAD is that it works well with external editors, such as vim.
The higher tier packages have a 3d constraint system. Imagine Sketchup and AutoCAD had a baby with some parametrics thrown in.
I personally own Sketchup, TurboCAD and BricsCAD. BricsCAD is the one I use the most, it obsoletes Sketchup for me totally. I much prefer it to the AutoCAD OEM I use at work and I possibly would pick it over SolidWorks. Although my SolidWorks experience is much more limited.
It's still proprietary but one of the few CAD packages I found that runs on linux and you can own without paying a monthly fee.
But yes, one will have to make compromises.
That's a bit patronizing.
> I have a long post in this very thread about alternatives.
I did read that post, and it comes to much the same conclusions as mine. For the two-hour hobbyist projects I dabble with, the cost is acceptable.
What would you suggest? Complaining is easy.