Open MatthiasJ1 opened 1 month ago
A Compound has no dimension as it can contain 1, 2 or 3 dimensional objects. To "fix" this the Compound wrapper would have to be stripped off effectively reversing what the user did. Do you have a more realistic example?
A Compound is a generic container so its dimension is equal to the dimension of its contained shapes.
Compound<3>() + Part() = Compound<3>()
Compound<2>() + Sketch() = Compound<2>()
Compound<?>() + Sketch() = Compound<2>()
Compound<3>() + Sketch() = Error
Compound<?>() + Compound<?>() = Compound<?>()
An example without calling Compound:
p = Sphere(1) + Sphere(1).fuse(Sphere(1))
Everything here is obviously 3D, yet i get ValueError: Only shapes with the same dimension can be added
A Compound is a generic container so its dimension is equal to the dimension of its contained shapes.
Not always, Compounds are more generic:
c = Compound(
[
Circle(1),
Line((0, 0, 0), (0, 0, 5)).edge(),
Pos(0, 0, 6) * Cone(1, 0, 2),
]
)
is a valid Compound. In ocp_vscode
I have to treat them differently, i.e. unroll these "mixed" Compounds.
To achieve what you want, currently you have to wrap the fuse
result into a Part
:
a = Sphere(1) + Part(Box(3, 0.2, 0.2).fuse(Box(0.2, 0.2, 3)))
So issue to me is less that Part + Compound
should work (it can't for mixed Compounds).
I am not sure fuse
should automatically convert to a Part
(it is on the direct API level), but maybe a best practice is to:
Either not mixin direct API calls and use proper algebra operators, i.e. Sphere(1) + Box(3, 0.2, 0.2) + Box(0.2, 0.2, 3)
, or to wrap the result into a Part
if using direct API is necessary.
How would I write a dimension agnostic operation then? For example, the builtin mirror
function only returns the mirrored object but I want a version that returns the symmetric object:
def mirror_keep(obj: Union[Edge, Wire, Face, Compound, Curve, Sketch, Part]):
return Compound(children=[obj, mirror(obj)])
This does not work due to the above issue. I could instead do
return obj + mirror(obj)
but that is an unneeded and much more expensive operation (in some cases this difference can be very significant)
You can do:
Part([b, mirror(b)])
Sketch([s, mirror(s)])
Curve([w, mirror(w)])
b = Pos(0,1,0) * Box(1,1,1)
and s = b.shell()
and w = b.wire()
Not sure you need a function or an assembly. Compound
(and Part
, Sketch
and Curve
are Compound
s) should do what you want.
If you want a function, check the type of the input object and depending on the type use the above
The dimension check is only done with the +
operator not the fuse
method so if you'd like to avoid the check just use the fuse
method directly - assuming the specific situation is going to result in something that makes sense.
The following:
gives this contradictory error:
This is a contrived example, however, such a scenario can often arise when using Algebra mode.