Empathy List Archives

P

Parkinbot

Tue, Jan 17, 2017 2:10 PM

This is, what I mean by "prone to faulty output" and "kamikaze".
If you know, what you do, the result will pay off your effort, e.g. sweep().
But if you don't, you mess up everything and start to curse into the wrong
direction, ignoring the wellknow fact that there is no free lunch.

polyhedron() and polygon() are currently kamikaze operations. Plugging this
holes will be a lot effort and slow things down significantly. Ignoring them
is more or less a thumbs-up for lazy_union().

--
View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/rendering-for-paper-assembly-manual-tp20108p20145.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

This is, what I mean by "prone to faulty output" and "kamikaze". If you know, what you do, the result will pay off your effort, e.g. sweep(). But if you don't, you mess up everything and start to curse into the wrong direction, ignoring the wellknow fact that there is no free lunch. polyhedron() and polygon() are currently kamikaze operations. Plugging this holes will be a lot effort and slow things down significantly. Ignoring them is more or less a thumbs-up for lazy_union(). -- View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/rendering-for-paper-assembly-manual-tp20108p20145.html Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

P

Parkinbot

Tue, Jan 17, 2017 3:03 PM

Ronaldo,
OpenSCAD is single threaded. So RAM size can play an import role, when
scaling up a problem.

You are right about the similarities. That's why I noted "The implementation
has some similarities with your sweep interface". A lazy_union() over a set
of polyhedron() calls could even do away with it and just merge the points
and faces into a single call. This would open the door to composing 3D
objects by a set of surfaces ... Also your approach, and your desire, I
know.

I am using this lazy_union technique to be able to compose and render gear
systems with a large amount of teeth that have been 3D shape optimized by a
separate process, similar to my simplified 2D gear cutter project
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:636119 . Currently I am using this path
to include scad-converted versions of my stls, which consumes time, memory
and is the work-around for a work-around of a work-around of

lazy_union() forN(r=radius, N=numteeth) mytooth();

Concerning the merge with "C-style for": First I had an old recursive
version in my lib, which I could tweak by faktor ~5 employing "each" and
"C-for". So there is progress in OpenSCAD with every new build.

--
View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/rendering-for-paper-assembly-manual-tp20108p20146.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Ronaldo, OpenSCAD is single threaded. So RAM size can play an import role, when scaling up a problem. You are right about the similarities. That's why I noted "The implementation has some similarities with your sweep interface". A lazy_union() over a set of polyhedron() calls could even do away with it and just merge the points and faces into a single call. This would open the door to composing 3D objects by a set of surfaces ... Also your approach, and your desire, I know. I am using this lazy_union technique to be able to compose and render gear systems with a large amount of teeth that have been 3D shape optimized by a separate process, similar to my simplified 2D gear cutter project <http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:636119> . Currently I am using this path to include scad-converted versions of my stls, which consumes time, memory and is the work-around for a work-around of a work-around of > lazy_union() forN(r=radius, N=numteeth) mytooth(); Concerning the merge with "C-style for": First I had an old recursive version in my lib, which I could tweak by faktor ~5 employing "each" and "C-for". So there is progress in OpenSCAD with every new build. -- View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/rendering-for-paper-assembly-manual-tp20108p20146.html Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

TP

Torsten Paul

Tue, Jan 17, 2017 5:52 PM

On 01/17/2017 12:26 PM, Parkinbot wrote:

Beyond time, since the whole workflow is defined for linux
being on Windows it doesn't seem viable to me to branch out
an own version and just implement it.

We don't have anyone who did get it running via VisualStudio,
but a dev environment on Windows should work via MSYS2 and
QtCreator as IDE:
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/OpenSCAD_User_Manual/Building_on_Microsoft_Windows

I don't know when this was used last, so there is a chance
a library is missing, but otherwise there were not that much
changes regarding the build system I think.

ciao,
Torsten.

On 01/17/2017 12:26 PM, Parkinbot wrote: > Beyond time, since the whole workflow is defined for linux > being on Windows it doesn't seem viable to me to branch out > an own version and just implement it. > We don't have anyone who did get it running via VisualStudio, but a dev environment on Windows should work via MSYS2 and QtCreator as IDE: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/OpenSCAD_User_Manual/Building_on_Microsoft_Windows I don't know when this was used last, so there is a chance a library is missing, but otherwise there were not that much changes regarding the build system I think. ciao, Torsten.

M

MichaelAtOz

Wed, Jan 18, 2017 4:52 AM

@Parkinbot and @Ronaldo

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/if_all_you_have_is_a_hammer,_everything_looks_like_a_nail
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/if_all_you_have_is_a_hammer,_everything_looks_like_a_nail

Yes, I understand wonderful things are possible with triangles, and you have
a hammer which works with triangular nails.

But when you have a circle()'ular peg you cannot hammer it into a square()
hole.

Will you please stop side tracking threads.

Admin - PM me if you need anything, or if I've done something stupid...

Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above.

The TPP is no simple “trade agreement.” Fight it! http://www.ourfairdeal.org/ time is running out!

View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/rendering-for-paper-assembly-manual-tp20108p20155.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

@Parkinbot and @Ronaldo https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/if_all_you_have_is_a_hammer,_everything_looks_like_a_nail <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/if_all_you_have_is_a_hammer,_everything_looks_like_a_nail> Yes, I understand wonderful things are possible with triangles, and you have a hammer which works with triangular nails. But when you have a circle()'ular peg you cannot hammer it into a square() hole. Will you please stop side tracking threads. ----- Admin - PM me if you need anything, or if I've done something stupid... Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above. The TPP is no simple “trade agreement.” Fight it! http://www.ourfairdeal.org/ time is running out! -- View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/rendering-for-paper-assembly-manual-tp20108p20155.html Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

P

Parkinbot

Wed, Jan 18, 2017 9:05 AM

MichaelAtOz wrote

Will you please stop side tracking threads.

????

--
View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/rendering-for-paper-assembly-manual-tp20108p20157.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

MichaelAtOz wrote > Will you please stop side tracking threads. ???? -- View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/rendering-for-paper-assembly-manual-tp20108p20157.html Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

discuss@lists.openscad.org

rendering for paper assembly manual...

The TPP is no simple “trade agreement.” Fight it! http://www.ourfairdeal.org/ time is running out!