I think it will open up a lot more possibilities for making new kinds of extensions. And also, this would work 
I do know we can do something like this in javascript. But I think a group with all objects will be more intuitive.
Agreed i thought of this multiple times too. While i see many useful uses too, i think this may be very bad for performance and the problems it solves may be solved through better ways.
The biggest issue i see is object picking: what should it do? Always target all objects? Then you would not be able to use the object you just created, since it wouldn’t be explicitly selected. Apply object selection? Then if you use it in an external event or events based function, and the user used it in the scene events before, the sleeted objects would propagate and break that code. Generally it has the potential to cause all sorts of unintuitive behaviors in regards to object picking. So i would rather not add this, even though I see the benefits, as i think this is a rather hacky solution that would do a lot of things but not do them very well, and we should rather focus on making multiple solutions that each work very well.
1 Like
I would suggest adding it is possible as a parameter (for a function from an extension) to pass the “Group” type (similar to the current Objects type). In this case, it would be possible to control the number of objects (not all, but use only the necessary ones) when performing operations.