2016-03-30 14:54 GMT+02:00 Christopher Sean Morrison <brl...@mac.com>:
>
> On Mar 30, 2016, at 7:39 AM, Daniel Roßberg <danielmrossb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> 2016-03-29 17:20 GMT+02:00 Christopher Sean Morrison <brl...@mac.com>:
>
>
>
> The project can define a polygonal mesh structure that is compatible with
> the STL format, which both OpenSCAD and BRL-CAD support. It's a simple and
> limited format, but trivial to convert to/from. It is essentially an array
> of floating point vertices and an array of faces with integer references
> into the vertex array [*].
>
> [snip]
>
> [*] This is essentially what BRL-CAD's BoT structure implements, but this
> shared library could implement a simpler compatible structure.
>
>
> This would mean that the mesh healing function changes (somebody could
> say "destroys") the original mesh structure because the additional
> features of BoT, NMG and OpenSCAD get lost simply by converting the
> mesh back and forth, which is not optimal.
>
>
> This is true. There can be a topological/connectivity/ordering change with
> a simpler common structure. However, that by itself shouldn’t change the
> geometry shape.
I thought at the BoT's normals. They can heavily influence the look.
OpenSCAD could have similar issues.
The "heal" command is likely to be used to fix problems, not to cause ones.
> The alternative is picking something that directly reflects NMG or
> OpenSCAD’s structure like you suggested, creating the same mesh conversion
> problem for the other and anyone else not using that structure … unless they
> happen to all use the more general radial-edge structure like Blender and
> BRL-CAD. :)
>
> Inflicting that complexity on others seems somewhat cruel and unusual.
> Picking something like half-edge means some meshes simply cannot be
> represented. Do we know what OpenSCAD uses?
>
> I can see it working either way myself, no attachment to and tradeoffs with
> either approach. It’s worth noting that mesh healing will be changing the
> topology/connectivity/ordering implicitly, so I wouldn’t think topology
> matters much by the time someone is needing something healed.
The hole issue looks like a classical application for an adapter to
me. Such objects are usually much more easily to implement as
converters.
However, thinks Rakshika of it?
Regards,
Daniel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transform Data into Opportunity.
Accelerate data analysis in your applications with
Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library.
Click to learn more.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785471&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
BRL-CAD Developer mailing list
brlcad-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/brlcad-devel
