[OpenSCAD] Why is this so heavy to OpenScad?

Hans L thehans at gmail.com
Sun Nov 10 20:23:28 EST 2019


I've submitted a pull request to MCAD (
https://github.com/openscad/MCAD/pull/66 ), to improve roundedBox.

It should work fine as a drop-in replacement for boxes.scad.

Due to potential issues with backwards compatibility, I've left it
open for discussion if the approach I used is the best option.
In order to be more consistent with native OpenSCAD modules, i gave
the new module a slightly different interface, and a different name:
"roundedCube".
Calling "roundedBox" module will still work, and use the new
hull-based implementation, but will echo deprecation warnings.

In the meantime if you don't want to wait for that to be officially
merged, you can directly download the updated file here:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/openscad/MCAD/e08302349e0e1bf77f6e13a3948386e2ec134def/boxes.scad

Hans

On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 4:54 PM Jordan Brown
<openscad at jordan.maileater.net> wrote:
>
> On 11/10/2019 2:37 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
>
>     function adj(d, sides) = d/cos(360/sides/2);
>
>
> BTW, trig/computer tidbit of the day:  Alexa gets acos( ) and asin( ) completely wrong.
>
> For instance, she says that asin(0.5) is 0.0087, and that acos(0.5) is 1.5621.  (Correct are 0.52 and 1.05.)  Actually, it appears that all asin( ) results are about zero, and all acos( ) results are about 1.57.  Also, for sin(x) and cos(x), x is in degrees, but for asin( ) and acos( ) the answer appears to be in radians.
>
> I guess Alexa was distracted during her high school trig class.
>
> I tentatively suspect that they did acos(degrees_to_radians(x)) instead of radians_to_degrees(acos(x)).
>
> I filed a bug report.
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenSCAD mailing list
> Discuss at lists.openscad.org
> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org



More information about the Discuss mailing list