Closed arturoc closed 6 years ago
I don't know if this assert min_bound == min_bound
should be min_bound == max_bound
, because otherwise it would be better to write assert!(!min_bound.is_nan())
also it panics because it is NaN. ./ncollide_pipeline/narrow_phase/contact_generator/one_shot_contact_manifold_generator.rs:59 println!("{}", coll.normal.as_ref()); prints NaN
This issue is due to a regression in the handling of objects that are just touching, i.e., separated by a distance of 0, but not penetrating.
The assertion min_bound == min_bound
should indeed be min_bound.is_nan()
, though it is not because it does not exists for the associated type P::Real
.
thanks for the quick fix! is there any possibility that you create a 0.14.1 fix release with this? right now 0.14 is crashing for anything that has shapes that are touching like these ones.
@arturoc I've made a release that includes the fix just now.
thanks!
After updating to 0.14, the following code which worked before is now panicking on the above assertion when calling update on the world:
with backtrace: