tries, of different types, both annotation objects and curves, won't it be slow to iterate through all these objects for each rectangle?
I use 0.6.X but i'm soon making the shift to 0.7.X…
ve is most impacted by the characteristics of the vector field...If accuracy is not so important, you can use the curve re-sampling components to create a smoothe curve.…
gone with the wind topic: since this is utterly Academic the main issue here is to oversimplify LBS (in real life: a collection of columns/beams/slabs/X members + tube frame rigid members (shafts/elevators/cats/dogs)). Reason is that if we use the real "solids" (turned into meshes) as the "node" pool for the hinges required ... only HAL 9000 could solve it in "real-time" (for instance an E5 Xeon 1630 v3 takes ... several minutes). And this is ... er ... challenging I must say. This is a typical case where "simplifying" means "stupidity" almost instantly.
Spam on:
where's my collection of "bend-a-truss-that-looks-like-a-tower" K1 demo defs? Is in this workstation or in another? (blame Alzheimer).
Spam off.
More soon.…
This equation has the same issue as the code I posted. While the curve is the same, the units are off, as seen in my screenshot where the ymax goes well above 80
a spline? In a more general setting of semi-algebraic sets there is the Tarski-Seidenberg Theorem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarski%E2%80%93Seidenberg_theorem that says the projection of a semi-algebraic set is itself a semi-algebraic set. As nurbs surfaces and breps defined by them are semi-algrbaric sets this means that the projection must be reasonably nice. I could not discover whether it is always a spline. There are however reasonably nice ways to get splines from algebraic curves, though we are back to an approximation. It would be nice to have an algorithm that is guaranteed to give the precise splines when they exist (as in the example above) and will otherwise give a good approximation, I was not able to find if one has been written, even in the theoretical literature.…