3 ms·
Programming is my day job, so being able to think of solid objects in terms of code just makes sense to me. I find myself using OpenSCAD more and more just for
by alexose 7y ago
Programming is my day job, so being able to think of solid objects in terms of code just makes sense to me. I find myself using OpenSCAD more and more just for sketching out ideas, and experimenting with shapes that would be hard to make using traditional CAD.
I dream of a day when parametric CAD is bundled with a usable package library. Being able to `import` versioned parts would be a huge upgrade, and would lead to the development of better standard libraries.
There are also some land mines around the rendering process, e.g. shapes that render just fine as a preview, but will crash the CGAL renderer. I’ve also had the opposite happen. It seems like there’s room to add better validation (or maybe a way of automatically simplifying ASTs?) before they hit the renderer.
- nikolaj 7y agoCadQuery (python lib that wraps freecad's CAD kernel) is a bit more similar to a traditional CAD system in terms of how it constructs parts (workplane, etc). Also, onshape.com (commercial with hobby free tier) has a scripting interface that i believe is js-like (i have not yet had to use it, but i use onshape quite a bit for hobby projects). Their versioning and importing of community parametric parts is pretty tight imo.
- neutronicus 7y agoOnShape uses Parasolid (best-in-class geometry kernel used by a LOT of different commercial CAD products) under the hood so if you are trying to make a manufacturing quality part it will stand you in good stead. OpenCASCADE (FreeCAD's kernel) is pretty good too.
- jf___ 7y agono, CadQuery is a wrapper on top of PythonOCC
- salamanderman 7y agoSame thing
- kilohotel 7y agoYou can do functionally defined implicit modeling in http://ntopology.com http://ntopology.com