[OpenSCAD] Unusual hull() and minkowski modelling
rcmpersiano at gmail.com
Fri Jun 17 13:18:41 EDT 2016
I usually like your approach, your way of thinking, and certainly the
experience you bring to the discussions. For me, it is like a counterpoint
to mine ways. And I like diversity.
I agree that the ideas I expressed will have a short live. May be in the
next version. My intention however was to show the gain in expressiveness
when you mix 3D objects with lower dimension ones. I can't see anything
clearer then express a sweep as a minkowski of a solid with a curve or
polyline. And it would be a gain to express the sweep as such. I am not
saying that it should be done that way now because minkowski is lot
expensive yet. May be in the future.
I disagree however that your 'Occam's razor' solution to the drop code is
clearer then mine. I agree that the definition point3() is polemics due to
its use of degenerescence but the drop code is clearer then using a almost
degenerated cylinder. The ideal would be to have primitives point(), edge(),
polygon(), etc that were mixable with 3D solids in a proper way. In that
case, who would code a drop like yours?
Observe that minkowski is processed by CGAL and the library accepts and
process correctly the mix of 3D with lower dimension figures. There is no
real complexities or break in robustness in those mixing. Neither
theoretically nor in the algorithms. What is missing is a way to express
this without to resort to degenerated codes.
View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/Unusual-hull-and-minkowski-modelling-tp17730p17747.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the Discuss