SolveSpace is quite fantastic as a technical achievement, but it's rather limited in terms of CAD. It's great for simple designs or just messing around, though, I'm very impressed.
SolveSpace has NO "limits in terms of CAD" (as SolveSpace 3.0 actually in active development, heavy rework & list of implemented features growing each week) — the only limits it has is that for creating _too_complex_ solids & assembly it just requires to use more tricks & more powerful PC ;)
When people say "CAD" they are talking about any number of technical things.
Say you want to insure a free form surface is a minimum radius connecting all other surfaces. Depending on the scenario, one may be able to do that in the software today, but doing it may require well above average math and geometry skills.
In "CAD", the skill requirement is much reduced, leaving the user more focused on requirements and overall design intent, not implementation details.
Just FYI, on what "CAD" often means to people.
Yep, I know. I use 'master' builds since SolveSpace became open-source.[0]
SolveSpace is my daily engineering tool during last 7 years ;)
[0] http://libregraphicsworld.org/blog/entry/solvespace-released...
One big "quality of life" thing that even OnShape is missing that Fusion has is the ability to dimension a line from another line, i.e. you can specify a dimension as "line_23 / 2", which allows you to do math with the other element as a variable. It's a pretty small feature, but extremely useful.
SolveSpace has a lot of constraints & this is a key feature of SolveSpace.
What "missing constraints" you talking about?