7 ms·

Dune3d: A parametric 3D CAD application

236 points by luu 7mo ago

idiotsecant 7mo ago
Its not often you see 'fillets and chamfers' are tip-line features in the readme for CAD packages. But good on you for building something.
- magicalhippo 7mo ago
  > Its not often you see 'fillets and chamfers' are tip-line features in the readme for CAD packages. Well the readme states the following: Solvespace on the other hand gets the workflow part right, but falls short by not importing STEP and the geometry kernel not supporting chamfers and fillets. So I assume that's where that comes from.
  - idiotsecant 6mo ago
    Perhaps. I guess I'm saying 'oh boy fillets and chamfers' marks it as not very serious CAD hardware. That's table stakes
- Sakthimm 7mo ago
  Well, implementing fillets and chamfers is no easy task, so it's well deserved to be there. Source: been there, done that.
- alanbernstein 7mo ago
  It has been one of the main complaints about openscad for some time
  - WillAdams 7mo ago
    Hull and Minkowski operations sort of allow one to do this sort of thing, but add to the mathematical complexity in what is probably the worst-possible way....
- Brian_K_White 7mo ago
  fillets and chamfers are at the same time both ridiculously difficult and ridiculously important.
- carpenecopinum 7mo ago
  This is honestly the first thing I look for with anything new claiming "CAD". Roughly every other week there is a new "The (programmable) CAD that fixes everything!" post on the front page, just for me to open them up excitedly and noticing that they use a mesh kernel and will thus never be able to provide fillets and chamfers painlessly (for the user). All while they are absolutely essential for a lot of designs, especially in 3D-printing, a well-placed fillet/chamfer can make the difference between an object that breaks upon looking at it funny and one that can bear significant load.
  - WillAdams 7mo ago
    Yeah, it's a tough row to hoe --- I've been handling it quite differently in my own project, taking "Design for Manufacturing" to the ultimate conclusion and requiring that the part be designed by actually applying tooling: https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview Needs a full-on re-write to make the G-code export (and import) work well, but lately I've been focused on exporting to DXFs w/ colour/layer tagging which was just added as an import feature in the CAD tool my side-gig employer does.
  - dgroshev 7mo ago
    G2 fillets are the next frontier. Even Fusion doesn't seem to handle them well. I mean they can be created without much drama, but geometry derived from them is very likely to fail with no real reason.
mountainriver 7mo ago
FreeCAD is the worst. Thanks for building this!
- mft_ 7mo ago
  (I seem to be cast in the role of FreeCAD advocate on HN these days, but here goes!) For years I agreed with you - I tried FreeCAD multiple times, different versions, always sucked. Then I watched this video [0] and discovered that v1.1 is different - and that it's good enough for solid reliable hobby usage. It's still a touch frustrating in a few areas (text, for example) but I've now switched over to it completely. [0] https://youtu.be/VEfNRST_3x8 https://youtu.be/VEfNRST_3x8
  - elaus 7mo ago
    I agree. freeCAD has become a tool that I just use without thinking about it. Earlier versions always made me question my choice and try out other software.
  - daotoad 7mo ago
    I really, really want that to be true, but my experience trying to adopt it has been really painful. Even selecting things in the UI has sucked. I went in and increased the selection radius or whatever, that helped. But really, should I need to do this as a new user? Getting the constraints to behave is like pulling teeth. It also kind of sucks that you have to have really sparse sketches that only contain one closed figure. I gather you can create a "master sketch" and selectively project geometry into other sketches. But the last few times I've tried the app, I haven't gotten far enough into my sketches before rage quitting to validate the technique. Right now I am back F360 with their hobby license wanting to escape their regular messing with the terms and conditions.
    - mft_ 7mo ago
      > Even selecting things in the UI has sucked. I went in and increased the selection radius or whatever, that helped. But really, should I need to do this as a new user? Agree - selection isn’t broken, but it’s definitely sometimes frustrating and as it’s such a common function, absolutely should be as close to perfect as possible. I think it’s partly that the visual indication of what you’re hovering over and would be selected is too subtle, and also I’ve found (on Mac; I’ve not confirmed on other OSs) that it’s not selecting what’s at the exact tip of the pointer, but is rather selecting a couple of pixels away. > Getting the constraints to behave is like pulling teeth. Huh, once I’ve actually selected correctly, I find the constraints are fine - say, 95% as good as Solidworks. > It also kind of sucks that you have to have really sparse sketches that only contain one closed figure. Can you explain what you mean by this? Do you mean you can’t have a sketch with (to take a very simple example) a circle inside a circle, or two unrelated circles, or something else?
jetter 7mo ago
Also check out modelrift.com which is based on openscad foundation. See the dynamic customizer which allows to edit any model parameter, re-render and get .stl: https://modelrift.com/models/customizable-liquid-funnel https://modelrift.com/models/customizable-liquid-funnel - it works _completely_ in your browser by using WASM
Evidlo 7mo ago
Some other open source 3D CAD tools: Code-based - CadQuery - https://github.com/CadQuery/cadquery/ https://github.com/CadQuery/cadquery/ - build123d - https://github.com/gumyr/build123d https://github.com/gumyr/build123d - OpenSCAD - https://openscad.cloud/openscad/ https://openscad.cloud/openscad/ GUI (browser-based) - Cadmium (abandoned, cool idea) - https://mattferraro.dev/posts/cadmium https://mattferraro.dev/posts/cadmium
- RobotToaster 7mo ago
  Brl-cad https://brlcad.org/ https://brlcad.org/
- gmueckl 7mo ago
  FreeCAD: https://freecad.org https://freecad.org
  - Pay08 7mo ago
    I would not suggest anyone use FreeCAD. The UX is the worst I've seen for any software. Finding any functionality is next to impossible.
    - gmueckl 7mo ago
      The UI has an awkward learning curve and some tools are weird, but it has become a rather solid CAD. Don't discount it in its current state, despite its warts.
    - bardsore 7mo ago
      I'm just a hobbyist with a 3D printer, but after watching a few tutorials it seems quite simple if you're only using the sketcher and part design 90% of the time.
    - mitthrowaway2 7mo ago
      I disagree. If you switch to the Part Design workbench, it's basically the exact same workflow as SolidWorks. Draw a sketch, add constraints, extrude / revolve / fillet, etc. Yes they have some unconventional names for certain operations, like "pad" instead of "extrude", and yes there's a confusingly-similarly-named "Part" workbench for doing CSG-style CAD, and yes it takes a bit of practice to get good at it. But it's not next to impossible.
reconnecting 7mo ago
Without context, it sounds like an FPS adaptation of a Dune game.
- tosti 7mo ago
  Yep, or a 3D adaptation of an RTS game.
  - Beretta_Vexee 7mo ago
    3D adaptation of the 1992 Cryo Interactive adventure game.
    - tosti 7mo ago
      The original CD version already had 3D. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ2U8_3EE9k&t=1000 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ2U8_3EE9k&t=1000
    - reconnecting 7mo ago
      Thanks for unlocked memories!
nathanmcrae 7mo ago
I have used this for throwing together some models for 3D printing. I've found it very intuitive, though I'm not sure how ergonomic it would be for complex assemblies. I really like the space-key based command access and default shortcuts for all the commands.
Levitating 7mo ago
Another simple GTK4 app for the ecosystem, nice. In case anyone is wondering, Dune3D as a flatpak is about 33mb. FreeCAD is 354mb. I enjoy having simple solutions that get simple things done. Will definitely give Dune3D a try.
freeopinion 7mo ago
Dune3d comes off like a reskin of SolveSpace. SolveSpace is pretty awesome, so that's not a knock, per se. I'll leave it to somebody with more experience to fill in what value Dune3D adds beyond SolveSpace.
- WillAdams 7mo ago
  I found the UI far more approachable in Dune 3D than any other 3D CAD program I've tried and as the readme notes, Dune 3D imports STEP files and does fillets/chamfers which SolveSpace does not (in the current version) There was a recent video on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1VNpC0nwF4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1VNpC0nwF4 If someone knows of a general introduction to 3D CAD which focuses on vendor-neutral descriptions of terminology and concepts, I'd be very interested --- I've done the tutorial for Dune 3D twice now (which is farther than I've gotten in any other 3D CAD tool), but keep getting hung up on subtleties/specifics which I have trouble describing for want of the correct terminology/understanding: https://github.com/dune3d/dune3d/discussions/118 https://github.com/dune3d/dune3d/discussions/118 When I tried to write up the usage of a far simpler program, one of the things which I tried to do was define all terminology as it was brought up: https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d/2d-drawing https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d/2d-drawing are there any tutorials for 3D CAD which attempt definitions along the way in this fashion?
  - leoedin 7mo ago
    I've had far more success following along video tutorials than written ones. Most written tutorials (as you've pointed out) miss far too much detail. Watching someone do it and copying along teaches all the menu navigation stuff implicitly. I've successfully learned quite a few EDA and 3D CAD tools that way. It's also effectively the way it's taught in a classroom - the teacher shows you and you copy.
    - WillAdams 7mo ago
      I've been trying that, but I've been having a hard time catching the nuances of terminology and minor differences in UI --- hopefully articles such as this will help to make Dune 3D more popular and more videos will show up. Another is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsOHTD1RYBY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsOHTD1RYBY I wish the person doing: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/res-16-002-how-to-cad-almost-anything-january-iap-2024/ https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/res-16-002-how-to-cad-almost-any... would revisit that course w/ Dune 3D.
fallat 7mo ago
So this is a smudge of like 4 projects? Huh. Definitely interested, but I wonder about the longevity of the system. That's one thing about the code cad systems I like: it's pretty easy to port code from one to another.
raziel2701 7mo ago
Would love to see a quick video demo showcasing the features, look and feel of the software. The same team made horizon eda, and I wasn't able to find videos on youtube about it that were newer than 2022, so I never gave it a shot either.
- gaske-p 7mo ago
  Just watched this the other day: https://youtu.be/T1VNpC0nwF4?si=T9XDd2_2sY0BaBFZ https://youtu.be/T1VNpC0nwF4?si=T9XDd2_2sY0BaBFZ
Surac 7mo ago
How much vibe coding is involved in this?
- mitthrowaway2 7mo ago
  It's by the team that did Horizon EDA, which is very much a "craftsmanship-first" effort. and they've been working on this for some time now. My guess is hardly any.
  - BozeWolf 7mo ago
    Is it a team really? Most commits seem to come from one user "carrotindustries". I am really interested in an Open Source CAD application with good UX, this one looks great. But I don't want to spend too much time on an application maintained mostly by a single developer. The risk of it being abandoned is too high.
    - WillAdams 7mo ago
      As opposed to what? Autodesk cogitating on what feature they can next do a rug-pull on? The source is available, worst-case scenario is one puts together the money to hire a developer to fix or improve at need.
- viernullvier 7mo ago
  None, at least not deliberately. Previous attempts at vibe-coded contributions have been politely rejected. Source: I am one of the contributors.
lutusp 7mo ago
Okay, but unless you choose to download the Windows executable, compiling from source is very difficult. Many people won't accept the Snap option on an otherwise open-source platform. This project improves on SolveSpace, but it does this by requiring dozens of mutually conflicting libraries. I create CAD videos, but for my students I decided against this project after seeing how difficult it was to compile. A FlatPak installer might help with this installation issue. Again, the Windows executable gets around these issues, for people still willing to put up with Windows.
- snoopen 7mo ago
  Even an AppImage would be great.
- majso 7mo ago
  There is a flatpak https://flathub.org/en/apps/org.dune3d.dune3d https://flathub.org/en/apps/org.dune3d.dune3d
  - lutusp 7mo ago
    Thanks -- I missed this. If it pans out, it might get me to shift away from SolveSpace, which has a few perpetually annoying quirks.
  - lutusp 7mo ago
    Second reply -- if anyone wants to run Dune3D, flatpak or compiled, they must set this flag in advance: export GDK_DEBUG="gl-prefer-gl" I discovered this while trying out the compiled version (it's essential for the program to run at all), and for some reason I thought the FlatPak install would have done away with this oddity. Again, because my students aren't necessarily techies, this kind of hacking shouldn't exist in a program released to mere mortals. But thanks again for alerting me to this release version.
- vincnetas 7mo ago
  took me two commands to get binary on osx. (i had brew already) brew install ... and ./scripts/build_macos.sh For windows instructions look equally trivial.
Aldipower 7mo ago
You can play Dune for DOS here: https://dos.zone/dune-cryo/ https://dos.zone/dune-cryo/
spiritplumber 7mo ago
is there something like sketchup make that isn't stuck in 2017?
- WillAdams 7mo ago
  Maybe Shapr3D? (for folks who are willing to pay monthly) or Moment of Inspiration 3D (commercial, perpetual license, by the former lead developer of Rhino 3D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9k4ZbcnW-Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9k4ZbcnW-Y )
WillAdams 7mo ago
FWIW, there has been some previous discussion here: 1.2 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41975958 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41975958 1.1 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40228068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40228068 1.0 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37979758 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37979758 (unfortunately, no discussion for 1.3, so I guess this stands in for 1.4)
panelpowder 7mo ago
Regarding the last point in his FAQ: Ofc. Let's reinvent the wheel, b/c improving the existing SW would be "too much effort", and btw NIH. Doofus.
- ua709 7mo ago
  " Hello everybody out there using minix - I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones." What's that guy thinking... Doofus.

236 points by luu 7mo ago

Its not often you see 'fillets and chamfers' are tip-line features in the readme for CAD packages. But good on you for building something.

magicalhippo 7mo ago
> Its not often you see 'fillets and chamfers' are tip-line features in the readme for CAD packages. Well the readme states the following: Solvespace on the other hand gets the workflow part right, but falls short by not importing STEP and the geometry kernel not supporting chamfers and fillets. So I assume that's where that comes from.
- idiotsecant 6mo ago
  Perhaps. I guess I'm saying 'oh boy fillets and chamfers' marks it as not very serious CAD hardware. That's table stakes
Sakthimm 7mo ago
Well, implementing fillets and chamfers is no easy task, so it's well deserved to be there. Source: been there, done that.
alanbernstein 7mo ago
It has been one of the main complaints about openscad for some time
- WillAdams 7mo ago
  Hull and Minkowski operations sort of allow one to do this sort of thing, but add to the mathematical complexity in what is probably the worst-possible way....
Brian_K_White 7mo ago
fillets and chamfers are at the same time both ridiculously difficult and ridiculously important.
carpenecopinum 7mo ago
This is honestly the first thing I look for with anything new claiming "CAD". Roughly every other week there is a new "The (programmable) CAD that fixes everything!" post on the front page, just for me to open them up excitedly and noticing that they use a mesh kernel and will thus never be able to provide fillets and chamfers painlessly (for the user). All while they are absolutely essential for a lot of designs, especially in 3D-printing, a well-placed fillet/chamfer can make the difference between an object that breaks upon looking at it funny and one that can bear significant load.
- WillAdams 7mo ago
  Yeah, it's a tough row to hoe --- I've been handling it quite differently in my own project, taking "Design for Manufacturing" to the ultimate conclusion and requiring that the part be designed by actually applying tooling: https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview Needs a full-on re-write to make the G-code export (and import) work well, but lately I've been focused on exporting to DXFs w/ colour/layer tagging which was just added as an import feature in the CAD tool my side-gig employer does.
- dgroshev 7mo ago
  G2 fillets are the next frontier. Even Fusion doesn't seem to handle them well. I mean they can be created without much drama, but geometry derived from them is very likely to fail with no real reason.

mountainriver 7mo ago

FreeCAD is the worst. Thanks for building this!

mft_ 7mo ago
(I seem to be cast in the role of FreeCAD advocate on HN these days, but here goes!) For years I agreed with you - I tried FreeCAD multiple times, different versions, always sucked. Then I watched this video [0] and discovered that v1.1 is different - and that it's good enough for solid reliable hobby usage. It's still a touch frustrating in a few areas (text, for example) but I've now switched over to it completely. [0] https://youtu.be/VEfNRST_3x8 https://youtu.be/VEfNRST_3x8
- elaus 7mo ago
  I agree. freeCAD has become a tool that I just use without thinking about it. Earlier versions always made me question my choice and try out other software.
- daotoad 7mo ago
  I really, really want that to be true, but my experience trying to adopt it has been really painful. Even selecting things in the UI has sucked. I went in and increased the selection radius or whatever, that helped. But really, should I need to do this as a new user? Getting the constraints to behave is like pulling teeth. It also kind of sucks that you have to have really sparse sketches that only contain one closed figure. I gather you can create a "master sketch" and selectively project geometry into other sketches. But the last few times I've tried the app, I haven't gotten far enough into my sketches before rage quitting to validate the technique. Right now I am back F360 with their hobby license wanting to escape their regular messing with the terms and conditions.
  - mft_ 7mo ago
    > Even selecting things in the UI has sucked. I went in and increased the selection radius or whatever, that helped. But really, should I need to do this as a new user? Agree - selection isn’t broken, but it’s definitely sometimes frustrating and as it’s such a common function, absolutely should be as close to perfect as possible. I think it’s partly that the visual indication of what you’re hovering over and would be selected is too subtle, and also I’ve found (on Mac; I’ve not confirmed on other OSs) that it’s not selecting what’s at the exact tip of the pointer, but is rather selecting a couple of pixels away. > Getting the constraints to behave is like pulling teeth. Huh, once I’ve actually selected correctly, I find the constraints are fine - say, 95% as good as Solidworks. > It also kind of sucks that you have to have really sparse sketches that only contain one closed figure. Can you explain what you mean by this? Do you mean you can’t have a sketch with (to take a very simple example) a circle inside a circle, or two unrelated circles, or something else?

jetter 7mo ago

Also check out modelrift.com which is based on openscad foundation. See the dynamic customizer which allows to edit any model parameter, re-render and get .stl: https://modelrift.com/models/customizable-liquid-funnel https://modelrift.com/models/customizable-liquid-funnel - it works _completely_ in your browser by using WASM

Evidlo 7mo ago

Some other open source 3D CAD tools: Code-based - CadQuery - https://github.com/CadQuery/cadquery/ https://github.com/CadQuery/cadquery/ - build123d - https://github.com/gumyr/build123d https://github.com/gumyr/build123d - OpenSCAD - https://openscad.cloud/openscad/ https://openscad.cloud/openscad/ GUI (browser-based) - Cadmium (abandoned, cool idea) - https://mattferraro.dev/posts/cadmium https://mattferraro.dev/posts/cadmium

RobotToaster 7mo ago
Brl-cad https://brlcad.org/ https://brlcad.org/
gmueckl 7mo ago
FreeCAD: https://freecad.org https://freecad.org
- Pay08 7mo ago
  I would not suggest anyone use FreeCAD. The UX is the worst I've seen for any software. Finding any functionality is next to impossible.
  - gmueckl 7mo ago
    The UI has an awkward learning curve and some tools are weird, but it has become a rather solid CAD. Don't discount it in its current state, despite its warts.
  - bardsore 7mo ago
    I'm just a hobbyist with a 3D printer, but after watching a few tutorials it seems quite simple if you're only using the sketcher and part design 90% of the time.
  - mitthrowaway2 7mo ago
    I disagree. If you switch to the Part Design workbench, it's basically the exact same workflow as SolidWorks. Draw a sketch, add constraints, extrude / revolve / fillet, etc. Yes they have some unconventional names for certain operations, like "pad" instead of "extrude", and yes there's a confusingly-similarly-named "Part" workbench for doing CSG-style CAD, and yes it takes a bit of practice to get good at it. But it's not next to impossible.

reconnecting 7mo ago

Without context, it sounds like an FPS adaptation of a Dune game.

tosti 7mo ago
Yep, or a 3D adaptation of an RTS game.
- Beretta_Vexee 7mo ago
  3D adaptation of the 1992 Cryo Interactive adventure game.
  - tosti 7mo ago
    The original CD version already had 3D. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ2U8_3EE9k&t=1000 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ2U8_3EE9k&t=1000
  - reconnecting 7mo ago
    Thanks for unlocked memories!

nathanmcrae 7mo ago

I have used this for throwing together some models for 3D printing. I've found it very intuitive, though I'm not sure how ergonomic it would be for complex assemblies. I really like the space-key based command access and default shortcuts for all the commands.

Levitating 7mo ago

Another simple GTK4 app for the ecosystem, nice. In case anyone is wondering, Dune3D as a flatpak is about 33mb. FreeCAD is 354mb. I enjoy having simple solutions that get simple things done. Will definitely give Dune3D a try.

freeopinion 7mo ago

Dune3d comes off like a reskin of SolveSpace. SolveSpace is pretty awesome, so that's not a knock, per se. I'll leave it to somebody with more experience to fill in what value Dune3D adds beyond SolveSpace.

WillAdams 7mo ago
I found the UI far more approachable in Dune 3D than any other 3D CAD program I've tried and as the readme notes, Dune 3D imports STEP files and does fillets/chamfers which SolveSpace does not (in the current version) There was a recent video on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1VNpC0nwF4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1VNpC0nwF4 If someone knows of a general introduction to 3D CAD which focuses on vendor-neutral descriptions of terminology and concepts, I'd be very interested --- I've done the tutorial for Dune 3D twice now (which is farther than I've gotten in any other 3D CAD tool), but keep getting hung up on subtleties/specifics which I have trouble describing for want of the correct terminology/understanding: https://github.com/dune3d/dune3d/discussions/118 https://github.com/dune3d/dune3d/discussions/118 When I tried to write up the usage of a far simpler program, one of the things which I tried to do was define all terminology as it was brought up: https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d/2d-drawing https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d/2d-drawing are there any tutorials for 3D CAD which attempt definitions along the way in this fashion?
- leoedin 7mo ago
  I've had far more success following along video tutorials than written ones. Most written tutorials (as you've pointed out) miss far too much detail. Watching someone do it and copying along teaches all the menu navigation stuff implicitly. I've successfully learned quite a few EDA and 3D CAD tools that way. It's also effectively the way it's taught in a classroom - the teacher shows you and you copy.
  - WillAdams 7mo ago
    I've been trying that, but I've been having a hard time catching the nuances of terminology and minor differences in UI --- hopefully articles such as this will help to make Dune 3D more popular and more videos will show up. Another is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsOHTD1RYBY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsOHTD1RYBY I wish the person doing: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/res-16-002-how-to-cad-almost-anything-january-iap-2024/ https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/res-16-002-how-to-cad-almost-any... would revisit that course w/ Dune 3D.

fallat 7mo ago

So this is a smudge of like 4 projects? Huh. Definitely interested, but I wonder about the longevity of the system. That's one thing about the code cad systems I like: it's pretty easy to port code from one to another.

raziel2701 7mo ago

Would love to see a quick video demo showcasing the features, look and feel of the software. The same team made horizon eda, and I wasn't able to find videos on youtube about it that were newer than 2022, so I never gave it a shot either.

gaske-p 7mo ago
Just watched this the other day: https://youtu.be/T1VNpC0nwF4?si=T9XDd2_2sY0BaBFZ https://youtu.be/T1VNpC0nwF4?si=T9XDd2_2sY0BaBFZ

Surac 7mo ago

How much vibe coding is involved in this?

mitthrowaway2 7mo ago
It's by the team that did Horizon EDA, which is very much a "craftsmanship-first" effort. and they've been working on this for some time now. My guess is hardly any.
- BozeWolf 7mo ago
  Is it a team really? Most commits seem to come from one user "carrotindustries". I am really interested in an Open Source CAD application with good UX, this one looks great. But I don't want to spend too much time on an application maintained mostly by a single developer. The risk of it being abandoned is too high.
  - WillAdams 7mo ago
    As opposed to what? Autodesk cogitating on what feature they can next do a rug-pull on? The source is available, worst-case scenario is one puts together the money to hire a developer to fix or improve at need.
viernullvier 7mo ago
None, at least not deliberately. Previous attempts at vibe-coded contributions have been politely rejected. Source: I am one of the contributors.

lutusp 7mo ago

Okay, but unless you choose to download the Windows executable, compiling from source is very difficult. Many people won't accept the Snap option on an otherwise open-source platform. This project improves on SolveSpace, but it does this by requiring dozens of mutually conflicting libraries. I create CAD videos, but for my students I decided against this project after seeing how difficult it was to compile. A FlatPak installer might help with this installation issue. Again, the Windows executable gets around these issues, for people still willing to put up with Windows.

snoopen 7mo ago
Even an AppImage would be great.
majso 7mo ago
There is a flatpak https://flathub.org/en/apps/org.dune3d.dune3d https://flathub.org/en/apps/org.dune3d.dune3d
- lutusp 7mo ago
  Thanks -- I missed this. If it pans out, it might get me to shift away from SolveSpace, which has a few perpetually annoying quirks.
- lutusp 7mo ago
  Second reply -- if anyone wants to run Dune3D, flatpak or compiled, they must set this flag in advance: export GDK_DEBUG="gl-prefer-gl" I discovered this while trying out the compiled version (it's essential for the program to run at all), and for some reason I thought the FlatPak install would have done away with this oddity. Again, because my students aren't necessarily techies, this kind of hacking shouldn't exist in a program released to mere mortals. But thanks again for alerting me to this release version.
vincnetas 7mo ago
took me two commands to get binary on osx. (i had brew already) brew install ... and ./scripts/build_macos.sh For windows instructions look equally trivial.

Aldipower 7mo ago

You can play Dune for DOS here: https://dos.zone/dune-cryo/ https://dos.zone/dune-cryo/

spiritplumber 7mo ago

is there something like sketchup make that isn't stuck in 2017?

WillAdams 7mo ago
Maybe Shapr3D? (for folks who are willing to pay monthly) or Moment of Inspiration 3D (commercial, perpetual license, by the former lead developer of Rhino 3D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9k4ZbcnW-Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9k4ZbcnW-Y )

WillAdams 7mo ago

FWIW, there has been some previous discussion here: 1.2 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41975958 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41975958 1.1 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40228068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40228068 1.0 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37979758 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37979758 (unfortunately, no discussion for 1.3, so I guess this stands in for 1.4)

panelpowder 7mo ago

Regarding the last point in his FAQ: Ofc. Let's reinvent the wheel, b/c improving the existing SW would be "too much effort", and btw NIH. Doofus.

ua709 7mo ago
" Hello everybody out there using minix - I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones." What's that guy thinking... Doofus.