4 ms·

I reread the sub-thread and I can see how my attention got carried away from the topic. The maintenance of models might be perceived as an add on to a much more

I reread the sub-thread and I can see how my attention got carried away from the topic. The maintenance of models might be perceived as an add on to a much more scientific-heavy CAD workflows. The value of engineering tools is not going to go away no matter how data exchange and collaboration tools advance. I hope you find people who can help with the scientific-heavy work that would certainly require funding. However I would still like to learn how PartCAD (and part-time open source hobbyists behind it, without any funding) can help nonetheless. I’d really like to learn what are the modelling needs of molecular nanotechnology. Would it need another packaging tool, or just a separate index repository to main another set of parts? Is there any chance you can consider the persistence layer being modular and implemented as code from day one? I would appreciate an opportunity to debate about it with an experienced professional.

adastra22 3y ago
We’re looking at various options for code representations of models. Stuff like cadquery is inspirational, but a stronger type system and runtime guarantees are needed. It also ties very closely to version control, as an AST-aware VCS can effectively merge edit histories with visual diffs, and permit editing the history itself. This more resembles the workflow of f-reps than b-reps, but we haven’t made a firm decision on representation. Having a standard repository of parts is also critical. We are also considering ways that the interface can be made modular and plugin driven such that importing a part into a workspace also imports widgets for instantiating and interacting with that part.
- RomanKuzmenko 3y ago
  I wonder myself why would we run third party Python scripts that can do anything, run an infinite loop, download something from Internet or delete files from the home folder, and keep our fingers crossed it calls “show_object” at the end… Have you considered using Java? I mean real classes that implement interfaces you introduce, not classes with a single “main()” method. So you instantiate an instance of that class when you add a part. You can use a handcrafted JVM or Javaagents to ensure that it’s only doing the things you want (like they do on Spark clusters to ensure that ML jobs are only doing ML). Since you are after describing and instantiating objects, why not using something so object oriented? I want to introduce something like that as an option in PartCAD to see if anyone likes to use it. Let me know if you want to give PartCAD a try for your model storing/sharing needs. I’ll be happy to customize/extend it for your needs. I always loved chemistry and physics but never had a chance to apply that at work.
  - adastra22 3y ago
    Web assembly makes a lot more sense than JVM these days. But I suspect we don’t want something Turing complete.
    - RomanKuzmenko 3y ago
      Hmm. Indeed that makes a lot of sense to use wasm instead. Let’s table the language aside for a moment. What data format would you expect to be spit out by third-party models? Is there anything generic enough to store both b-reps, f-reps, and whatever might be suitable for nanotechnology?

adastra22 3y ago

We’re looking at various options for code representations of models. Stuff like cadquery is inspirational, but a stronger type system and runtime guarantees are needed. It also ties very closely to version control, as an AST-aware VCS can effectively merge edit histories with visual diffs, and permit editing the history itself. This more resembles the workflow of f-reps than b-reps, but we haven’t made a firm decision on representation. Having a standard repository of parts is also critical. We are also considering ways that the interface can be made modular and plugin driven such that importing a part into a workspace also imports widgets for instantiating and interacting with that part.

RomanKuzmenko 3y ago
I wonder myself why would we run third party Python scripts that can do anything, run an infinite loop, download something from Internet or delete files from the home folder, and keep our fingers crossed it calls “show_object” at the end… Have you considered using Java? I mean real classes that implement interfaces you introduce, not classes with a single “main()” method. So you instantiate an instance of that class when you add a part. You can use a handcrafted JVM or Javaagents to ensure that it’s only doing the things you want (like they do on Spark clusters to ensure that ML jobs are only doing ML). Since you are after describing and instantiating objects, why not using something so object oriented? I want to introduce something like that as an option in PartCAD to see if anyone likes to use it. Let me know if you want to give PartCAD a try for your model storing/sharing needs. I’ll be happy to customize/extend it for your needs. I always loved chemistry and physics but never had a chance to apply that at work.
- adastra22 3y ago
  Web assembly makes a lot more sense than JVM these days. But I suspect we don’t want something Turing complete.
  - RomanKuzmenko 3y ago
    Hmm. Indeed that makes a lot of sense to use wasm instead. Let’s table the language aside for a moment. What data format would you expect to be spit out by third-party models? Is there anything generic enough to store both b-reps, f-reps, and whatever might be suitable for nanotechnology?