00:38 <GitHub> [solvespace] whitequark pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/commit/1480f890bd652a16028a7c8dc03bf20b019ba59f

00:38 <GitHub> solvespace/master 1480f89 whitequark: Add a check omitted in e5259d7a.

00:42 <reportingsjr> whitequark: you seem to be pretty knowledgeable about physiology, do you have an opinion on Gwern Branwen's wiritings? They seem really thorough, but I'm not sure how much credence to give many of them. (sorry this is totally off topic here, but I don't feel like this is appropriate for twitter :P)

00:48 <whitequark> reportingsjr: my understanding of physiology is quite rudimentary

01:38 <GitHub> [solvespace] whitequark opened issue #235: Crash when calculating a difference https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/issues/235

01:51 <GitHub> [solvespace] whitequark opened issue #236: Docs never mention that constraints in g(N) do not affect g(N-1) https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/issues/236

02:16 <GitHub> [solvespace] whitequark pushed 1 new commit to 2.x: https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/commit/b1d87bf284b32e875c8edba592113e691ea10bcd

02:16 <GitHub> solvespace/2.x b1d87bf whitequark: Fix a crash changing g->meshCombine when g->type!=EXTRUDE.

02:17 <GitHub> [solvespace] whitequark commented on issue #235: Fixed in master and 2.x. https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/issues/235#issuecomment-294329092

03:27 <GitHub> [solvespace] whitequark opened issue #237: Creating a solid bounded by wireframe https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/issues/237

03:52 <GitHub> [solvespace] jwesthues commented on issue #237: I don't think a useful "shell from wireframe" group is too hard. Take the lines/edges in 3d, and find all the planes defined by some set of adjacent edges. In each plane, find all the closed loops, and those are your faces. Then test that the faces make a watertight, non-self-intersecting shell, choose their normal directions to be consistent (like by choosing one arbitrarily, and then flooding out fr

05:16 <GitHub> [solvespace] Evil-Spirit commented on issue #237: @whitequark, This is looks like common triangle mesh editing mode like it done e. g. in 3d studio max. We are defining the common 3d entities(segments, circles, arcs) and introduce something like "3d polygon" request which creatse face from set of looped edges and perserve points to lay in the same plane using solver equations. This is like [direct modeling](http://isicad.ru/ru/news.php?news=12886)

05:17 <GitHub> [solvespace] Evil-Spirit commented on issue #237: @whitequark, This is looks like common triangle mesh editing mode like it done e. g. in 3d studio max. We are defining the common 3d entities(segments, circles, arcs) and introduce something like "3d polygon" request which creatse face from set of looped edges and perserve points to lay in the same plane using solver equations. This is like [direct modeling](http://isicad.ru/ru/news.php?news=12886)

05:18 <GitHub> [solvespace] Evil-Spirit commented on issue #237: @whitequark, This is looks like common triangle mesh editing mode like it done e. g. in 3d studio max. We are defining the common 3d entities(segments, circles, arcs) and introduce something like "3d polygon" request which creates planar face from set of looped edges and perserve points to lay in the same plane using solver equations. This is like [direct modeling](http://isicad.ru/ru/news.php?news=

05:19 <GitHub> [solvespace] whitequark commented on issue #237: Hm, this is a very interesting idea. We can add a "direct modeling group", where you would use parametric entities, but unlike regular draw-in-3d groups, the group would also include a solid, defined in the way @jwesthues described above. I think this solves all UI concerns I had. https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/issues/237#issuecomment-294334315

05:25 <GitHub> [solvespace] Evil-Spirit commented on issue #225: @whitequark updated https://github.com/Evil-Spirit/solvespace-master/commits/eigen https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/issues/225#issuecomment-294334457

05:28 <GitHub> [solvespace] Evil-Spirit commented on issue #225: @whitequark ... https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/issues/225#issuecomment-294334552

05:39 <GitHub> [solvespace] Evil-Spirit commented on issue #225: @whitequark, @jwesthues ... https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/issues/225#issuecomment-294334853

05:40 <GitHub> [solvespace] Evil-Spirit commented on issue #225: @whitequark ... https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/issues/225#issuecomment-294334552

06:32 <GitHub> [solvespace] jwesthues commented on issue #225: The most robust way to rank-test is usually an SVD. Take care in how you set the tolerance on the rank test. That's a count of singular values above some threshold; so perhaps set that threshold empirically by looking at the singular values for a variety of sketches with known number of redundant DOF, and putting it halfway (geometric mean) between the biggest "zero" and the smallest "nonzero". Make s

20:25 <Jonimus> whitequark: so I just checked a few different software packages here and a solvespace step does come in as a solid and not surfaces

20:53 <GitHub> [solvespace] Jonimoose commented on issue #206: I just imported an exported solvespace model into 3 different commercial CAD and CAM software packages and they all imported it as a "solid". ... https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/issues/206#issuecomment-294373679

21:14 <GitHub> [solvespace] diggit commented on issue #206: I have same problem with non solid STEP models in KiCAD which uses OCE for STEP model handling. (as well as FreeCAD) https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace/issues/206#issuecomment-294374644

21:24 <whitequark> Jonimus: which software?

21:25 <whitequark> Jonimus: ah I see you wrote in the issue

22:12 <Jonimus> whitequark: I can upload a step file of a sample model that doesn't have the issue so you can try and compare the files to see what they do differently.

22:12 <Jonimus> I tried to look through them and I couldn't really see a major difference.