[OpenSCAD] User Poll: What do you want to see from OpenSCAD development?

Max Bond max.o.bond at gmail.com
Tue Nov 12 14:11:27 EST 2019

Another thing I forgot, I'd love it if the GUI had a ruler that could
measure angles and distances

On Tue, Nov 12, 2019, 11:32 AM Jordan Brown <openscad at jordan.maileater.net>

> On 11/11/2019 11:19 PM, nop head wrote:
> Since all real objects are 2-manifold I don't see why OpenSCAD needs to be
> able to handle non-manifold designs. What advantage is it?
> Not having to take care to never allow two objects to touch?  Not having
> to explain to people what "manifold" means?
> (This isn't contrived; I've had real modeling cases where two objects
> happened to touch at a single point.  I had to figure out what was
> happening and then artificially tweak them apart.)
> If you want to print two cubes next to each then leave a small gap.
> Why?  Why should I have to do this, when the intent is obvious?
> They will then get two separate perimeters. If you want to print two cubes
> that are joined overlap them by your printers minimum wall width. Your
> model then represents what  you want your printer to print. If you export
> two cubes sharing an edge who knows what the printer will do? It is much
> better to give an error as soon as possible to avoid creating a model that
> can't be printed. Yes the printer may print something but it won't match
> the physically impossible model.
> My point is that *it doesn't matter* what the printer does.
> Why is there any practical difference between two cubes that share an
> edge, two cubes that are separated by a micrometer, and two cubes that
> overlap by a micrometer?  The printer's resolution isn't anywhere near that
> small. It can't match *any* of the three, yet the software treats them all
> as fundamentally different, and considers two "possible" and the third
> "impossible".
> When you say "can't be printed", do you mean "that the software can't
> handle", or do you mean "where what is printed does not perfectly match the
> mathematical model"?  If the software can't handle it, that's exactly the
> problem I'd like to see solved.  If the printed object does not perfectly
> match the mathematical model... *nothing* printed ever perfectly matches
> the mathematical model.  cube(100) is supposed to generate a cube 100 units
> on a side.  What gets printed is the result of mushing together a bunch of
> cylinders of plastic - the sides aren't flat, the edges are round instead
> of right angles, and it's measurably off 100 units.  Printing is *always*
> an approximation of the mathematical model.
> _______________________________________________
> OpenSCAD mailing list
> Discuss at lists.openscad.org
> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openscad.org/pipermail/discuss_lists.openscad.org/attachments/20191112/bc648f8c/attachment.html>

More information about the Discuss mailing list