Le 04/05/2016 17:47, clipka a écrit :
> Am 04.05.2016 um 17:42 schrieb clipka:
> 
>>> I would not clobber the actual object with such extension, but I might
>>> consider a new object (along the line of sor & lathe). The main "beauty"
>>> of ovus is being similar to torus, and simple.
>>> Can you provide a new name for such new beast ?
>>
>> I think the ovus primitive is the perfect place to put these extensions;
>> after all, I'm sure the ability to tweak these parameters will give us
>> better results when trying to approximate true egg shapes.
> 
> BTW, if you're worried that the extensions might seriously impact
> performance (which I doubt), you might have a look at the "torus"
> primitive, which currently maps to two different C++ objects depending
> on the parameters chosen: "Torus" for the standard case, and
> "SpindleTorus" for the case of a self-intersecting torus.
> 

Actually I was more thinking about other possible extension(s), like "open"
which could remove the spheres (a non-sense for ovus, per definition).

Why would I remove the spheres ? Well... with more parameters, and maybe a more
sexy syntax, it could come as an handy "arm"/"leg"/... object or part, in something
like a sphere_sweep. So to avoid coincident surfaces (and reduces the number of
objects ?),
it could be something like (think "cylinder" vs "torus")

sphere { P1, R1 }
limbs { P1, R1, P2, R2 , SR12 open } // distance between spheres is vlength(P2-P1)
sphere { P2, R2 }
limbs { P2, R2, P3, R3, SR23 open }
sphere { P3, R3 } // and so on

Px are points, Rx are radius, SRxy are spindle radius

And maybe, while we are at it, a function (for SDL) to compute the minimal radius of
the spindle

Post a reply to this message