On May 29, 2012, at 1:05 AM, phoenix wrote:

> > unevaluated boundary representation faceted polygonal mesh (nmg+csg)
> > evaluated boundary representation faceted polygonal mesh (nmg)
> > unevaluated boundary representation faceted triangle mesh (bot+csg)
> > evaluated boundary representation faceted triangle mesh (bot)
> > unevaluated boundary representation trimmed nurbs (brep+csg)
> > evaluated boundary representation trimmed nurbs (brep)
> > unevaluated implicit representation gridded volumetric (vol+csg)
> > evaluated implicit representation gridded volumetric (vol)
> 
> > Thoughts?  My main concern is recognizing the evaluated and unevaluated 
> > forms while keeping the form simple. 
> 
> The EVALUATE option sounds like a good idea, simplifying the logic a lot. As 
> far as I'm concerned, the current conversion.sh implements evaluated nmg and 
> bot conversion, right? If we select an unevaluated conversion, should the nmg 
> and bot conversion of evaluated combinations be included?

Hm, I wasn't thinking about the implication of EVALUATE to mean whether the CSG 
recipe is evaluated, but merely to indicate what output formats to "evaluate" 
the input geometry to.  You are correct, though, that it presently performs 
evaluated nmg and bot.  You'd be adding unevaluated brep nurbs and Anurag will 
probably end up adding evaluated volumetric.

> I'd like to keep the name "brep" instead of changing it to "nrb". Because we 
> commonly use the name "brep" for boundary representation trimmed nurbs, such 
> as rt_brep_internal, the rt_*_brep() functions, the brep command in MGED, and 
> so on. So I think it isn't quite misleading, as nmg and bot both have their 
> own common used names.

Agreed, "redefining" our usage of the term brep to imply anything other than 
nurbs isn't within scope.  Deviating without changing all other instances would 
just introduce inconsistency and probably be confusing.  Just a shame they 
aren't all 3-letters. :)

So then the main question remaining is how to distinguish the different forms, 
particularly brep vs brep+csg but also as it'll apply to the other formats?  
Space separated using the names above would be:  EVALUATE="bot nmg brep+csg"

Cheers!
Sean

p.s. Your replies keep coming back as html-formatted and the quoted lines get 
rendered literally instead of as quoted text.  Possible to change that to 
plain-text or change a setting that preserves the quoted context?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
BRL-CAD Developer mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/brlcad-devel

Reply via email to