You're right, but I far as I know the use of a C++ debugger is the
only way "to get a stacktrace from a segfault" if the segfault comes
from OCC.
Correct, but I wouldnt go for it after not having exhausted _all_
other methods ;')
This method allows you to test lots of possibilities in a very short
time...
Though I do think the tolerance your setting is not reasonable for
most CAD kernels...
Can you go further with this interesting argument? What is,
according to you, a "reasonable tolerance for a CAD kernel"?
Well, I should say "practical tolerance", usually 0.001
If you use really really high tolerances ( < 0.001 ) than the
algorithms in the kernel, all based on calculus just have to work so
much harder, with far less error margin.
So the smaller your tolerance, the more sensitive your geometry
becomes for error, more CPU cycles are used...
The point is; use practical tolerances, don't set these greater nor
lower than you explicitly need.
My experience ( surely domain specific! ) is that you rarely need to
go lower than 0.01
In architecture we deal with different tolerances than other
industries however.
I can imagine that you need very low tolerances for mechanical parts
for instance.
Offsetting is a very complex operation, and a tolerance of 0.00001 is
very very low... almost as low as the tolerances used in OCC ( 1e-5,
1e-6 ), so I'm not surprised that you run into problems...
( tolerances are a complex topic however, an angular tolerance of 0.01
is completely unacceptable for instance, OCC uses 1e-12 if I recall
correctly... )
-jelle
_______________________________________________
Pythonocc-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/pythonocc-users
