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

david vanhorn kc6ete at gmail.com
Tue Nov 12 20:26:12 EST 2019

I'd like to see clipping planes

On Tue, Nov 12, 2019, 5:26 PM Adam Purdie <adam at symmetry.ninja> wrote:

> This suggestions thread is being hijacked by this argument, how about
> people make suggestions and the OpenSCAD people decide what to include and
> we just leave disagreements to Twitter, Facebook and other social media.
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2019, 11:12 am Jordan Brown, <openscad at jordan.maileater.net>
> wrote:
>> On 11/12/2019 3:15 PM, nop head wrote:
>> It would mean I could accidentally design non-printable object instead of
>> being told it was non-manifold.
>> Why should OpenSCAD concern itself with printability?  If it does,
>> shouldn't it also reject ludicrously large objects or ludicrously small
>> ones?  Shouldn't it insist that all values be multiples of the print
>> resolution?
>> Maybe it's algorithmically impossible to disambiguate triangle-soup
>> representations that have shared edges.  (I don't know one way or
>> another.)  If so, that should prevent exports of such objects to
>> triangle-soup file formats, but shouldn't prevent it for file formats where
>> there's no problem.
>> If your slicer can't handle such an object... then that's on the slicer.
>> OpenSCAD can't represents objects with more than 3 dimensions, with
>> dimensions of zero or infinity or imaginary numbers. All of these are
>> mathematically possible by why spend time extending OpenSCAD to generate
>> them when they are not physically possible?
>> See, what we're disagreeing on is whether the objects being discussed are
>> physically impossible, *within the approximations implicit in 3D printing,
>> and in the real world at the microscopic and atomic levels*.
>> I contend that for all practical purposes they are possible, and that
>> they are certainly no more impossible than objects separated by epsilon or
>> overlapping by epsilon.
>> I don't remember:  were you one of the people who was arguing that
>> malformed polyhedra (disconnected faces, et cetera) should be allowed?
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenSCAD mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.openscad.org
>> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20191112/08ad9156/attachment.html>

More information about the Discuss mailing list