On 30-11-2017 2:37, Bald Eagle wrote:
> "Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> 
> 
>> Along those lines, you could build an array to store coordinates, "scan" the
>> bounding box of the figure with an x-y-z nested loop and inside(object, vector)
>> tests, and then use the pseudorandom selection process to pick known inside()
>> points.
>> The advantage there is that you could save the array to disk, and not have to
>> test the same figure every single time you wanted to place objects.  You
>> wouldn't even need to load the mesh for the figure either.
> 
> So, I managed to get this to work, and it seems like it gives fairly decent
> coverage.
> I think if I find the time, (and I'm reminded of this to-do item) I might try to
> figure out a way to use a spline to give greater probability of selecting the
> smaller volumes and less probability of selecting the larger volumes, resulting
> in a more even distribution.
> 
> Meet ... Jack.  :D
> 

That is looking good indeed. I need to ponder this a bit more; I think I 
know how to do this but I want to examine all the angles, so to speak. I 
can see the advantage of this procedure and it would avoid the 
subdividing of the container in discrete elements.

Saving the point locations is certainly an excellent idea. I shall 
certainly come to that eventually.

Well done indeed.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message