<enthdegree>
why does openscad have no useful primitives
<enthdegree>
footguns everywhere
<enthdegree>
i am stunned anyone has made anything with it at all
<teepee>
noted
snaked has joined #openscad
Joel has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<InPhase>
enthdegree: It has tons of useful primitives. But it is easy to find need for more. Hence, libraries.
rawgreaze has joined #openscad
<InPhase>
enthdegree: And from a formal topological perspective, ClosePoints can create any volume without a hole in it, or what we would call "topologically equivalent to a sphere". The CloseLoop routine can create any volume with 1 and only one hole in it, which we would call "topologically equivalent to a donut" (which includes things like coffee cups).
Joel has joined #openscad
<InPhase>
enthdegree: And I choose the series of loops method to define the surface because it turns out there is a massive class of problems where this is an extremely intuitive way to define a surface, and where this is much easier than other approaches. I wrote some other libraries for different problem cases.
<InPhase>
enthdegree: It is flexible enough though that you can pretty much do anything with it, as you can always take ClosePoints results and difference them from each other, which makes it a complete solution to all shapes. The goal though is to continually pick the optimal tool for expressing each shape. And in my opinion that module is it for a pretty important category of shapes that I find myself hitting
<InPhase>
all the time. It is certainly not the optimal way to express everything, so then I go hunting for or creating other solutions.
<enthdegree>
I feel like I am fighting the language
<enthdegree>
This part is guaranteed to have defects! Those Bezier curves give the inner elbows a positive radius though they should be sharp
misterfish has joined #openscad
snaked has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
snaked has joined #openscad
misterfish has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
misterfish has joined #openscad
guerd871 has joined #openscad
snakedGT has joined #openscad
muesli8 has joined #openscad
rawgreaze_ has joined #openscad
snaked has quit [*.net *.split]
rawgreaze has quit [*.net *.split]
guerd87 has quit [*.net *.split]
muesli has quit [*.net *.split]
foul_owl has quit [*.net *.split]
rawgreaze_ is now known as rawgreaze
muesli8 is now known as muesli
Guest59 has joined #openscad
foul_owl has joined #openscad
Guest59 has quit [Quit: Client closed]
mmu_man has joined #openscad
L29Ah has left #openscad [#openscad]
L29Ah has joined #openscad
J23k has joined #openscad
teepee_ has joined #openscad
guerdy has joined #openscad
guerd871 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
teepee has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
teepee_ is now known as teepee
crazy_imp has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
crazy_imp has joined #openscad
mmu_man has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
mmu_man has joined #openscad
<InPhase>
enthdegree: Well, it's a thing. I suppose from the structure of how you approached it so far you are part of the way on something you intend to be much more elaborate?
<enthdegree>
InPhase: not more elaborate, object just needs to be parameterized based on concrete world measurements
<enthdegree>
measurements are corner points along a path where a beam needs to go, so I am trying to make the code reflect it by (trying to) represent the beam as an extrusion along the measured path points
mmu_man has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
<enthdegree>
my approach is bad because it produces self-intersecting polyg in curves that are too tight
<enthdegree>
*polyhedra
<InPhase>
enthdegree: The trick is to always advance forward by small amounts, 0.001 or 0.01 or so, which can be irrelevant for printing purposes.
<juri_>
interesting, but as long as they want to be non-free...
<teepee>
yep, just what I'm thining. why would I even consider working for them for free?
<teepee>
well also *thinking* :)
<juri_>
tho, i am enjoying them going in a different dirrection than i am. greatful, even.
<teepee>
true, tossing around new ideas and discussing in public is not a bad thing
<teepee>
that said, you never know what's going to happen down the road... re red-hat
<Scopeuk>
it's more fun when it's fully in the open but at least idea in the open rather than all teh standard cloak and dagger with NDA's for the most generic project you've seen 12 times this week already again
<lf94>
Yeah no. I'm more interested in everyone's commentary
<juri_>
yeah. "go die over there please" generally sums up my attitude.
<lf94>
I think the language has no hope in high hell
<lf94>
STILL, my goal in code CAD space is to promote it. So KittyCAD serves a function for me.
<lf94>
(It's a commercial entity in the space)
<lf94>
They very well know I'm very skeptical of things
<juri_>
yeah. i've had enough commercial entity in my spaces, thank you very much.
<lf94>
Fair :)
<teepee>
my view is that we need to have a future where applications used by private people are free/open source and education is targeting that
<teepee>
I don't mind closed source stuff for running a company, and maintenance of that
<juri_>
sure, agreed.
<teepee>
that's where I get the money from to make a living
<lf94>
teepee: completely agree. I view KittyCAD as a marketing vehicle for the space.
<juri_>
I make mine writing free software, thankfully, and have spent my last three years working on a new slicer. i see 0 use for kittycad.
<lf94>
they can spend their millions toward marketing; we'll show everyone replicad and cadquery already offer everything for free lol.
<teepee>
the future where LG plays McDonalds commercials on their TVs until you stand up and say "I like McDonalds" must not happen
<lf94>
juri_: exactly it. there is absolutely zero use for kittycad. zero.
<juri_>
if they want a tool that fits their needs, there are plenty who will build it as free software, for currency. they're here to make a buck off of us.
<teepee>
I think that's the wrong marketing
<teepee>
I might be wrong, but I believe if you really want to push code cad + open source in general, the better strategy would be bringing things into the education space
<teepee>
I'm pretty sure kittycad advertising will not help other code cads
<lf94>
It has reach we will never have. A lot of people in CAD are mostly industry.
<teepee>
wrong target group, wrong scope, in my opinion
<juri_>
I'm actually targeting the CAM space.
<juri_>
and, of course, every hacker i can corner in a hallway.
<teepee>
:)
<teepee>
trying to push existing open source cad into companies seems like linux desktop 30 years ago
<teepee>
I'm not compatible with that "you have to clarify your calendar 6 month prior"
<lf94>
how? X]
<lf94>
ah
<teepee>
which means I usually get the summer tires finally installed once the first heat wave hits ;-)
<juri_>
I have an appointment to buy a house on camp day 2, so will not be there for that day. perfect timing. ;)
<lf94>
teepee: I do my own, easier scheduling B)
L29Ah has left #openscad [#openscad]
<teepee>
guso78_: regarding test cases, yes, in general it's ok to update the test results if there's a good reason. another option would be to fully enable the stable sorting first
L29Ah has joined #openscad
teepee_ has joined #openscad
teepee has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
teepee_ is now known as teepee
mmu_man has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
mmu_man has joined #openscad
misterfish has joined #openscad
kintel has joined #openscad
<kintel>
I agree with teepee; it's almost always preferable to split PRs into self-contained PRs implementing a single, well-defined change. This helps both explain for future readers why certain files changed, and allow us to perform more targeted undo operations in the future if something unexpected breaks. ..plus it makes code reviews easier and safer.
<kintel>
Drawback is slightly slower dev velocity
<kintel>
of course, we've all violated these principles in the past (and present and future ;)
kintel has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]