> > > Control over the number of faces isn't as granular but the options that >> are >> > i didn't think we need more control, but if there are some ideas, i would > be happy to improve the function. > > No, seems fine. I can't really imagine a realistic situation where some n would lead to shapes that are too angular yet n+1 would lead to cpu/gpu issues that could otherwise be avoided. I never really used different numbers for build-sphere anyway so one should do. Torus is way better for getting interesting use out of setting resolution in creative ways.
> your icosphere stacking scripts is great :). > > Build-in objects that inspire are great. Can't we somehow abstract this stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyhedroninto a equation that would get us all of the basic (platonic) ones and a good amount of the not so basic ones from a few numbers? That should be great fun. I'm not so sure how hard that would be but a good range of non-arbitrary generative shapes would be great to have. Writing whole equations inside of pdata-set! expressions is nice as a powertool but a bit on the hardcore side for live performance. Yours, Kas.
