Closed bfops closed 9 years ago
9f97e9f33c7c924e55ef771c2063c65048370f95 adds some cleanups (in particular, a brush is a mosaic with bounds).
I think some functions (e.g. translate
) might just need to be implemented for both mosaics and fields. Nothing wrong with that.
voxel::field::transformation
would be excellent - it could stack repeated translations and rotations in finite space.
Fields, mosaics, and brushes are all closely related, and some sharing is done. But the distinctions between them seem foggy and a little artificial, and some operations (e.g. union, translation, and rotation) make sense for more than one of these things.
A brush should really just be a mosaic with attached bounds.
The only real reason to separate fields and mosaics right now is because of the intersection operation - it makes sense for fields, but not when there are materials involved. But we could just say that every field is a material field, and that intersection is ill-defined when the materials of the components differ.