Sean (Aug 15 2018 at 19:42): Sean (Aug 15 2018 at 19:42):@starseeker saw your c71523 note with the random wiggling... are you sure it's doing work?? there definitely should have been SOME change (either more failures or more success) with a given tolerance. at a glance, continuing on OT_SAME doesn't seem right.
starseeker (Aug 16 2018 at 01:27):Yeah, it's doing something - if I check the facetize output messages and bump up the tweaking much larger, it reports different invalidity failures.
Sean (Aug 16 2018 at 02:47):still should check that it's actually doing what is expected to confirm. highly suspicious. much larger tolerance may simply be invalidating the nmg (which shouldn't be happening with random twiddling) vs nothing numerically. especially as there are shared coincident vertex indices in play.
starseeker (Aug 16 2018 at 12:29):I'm not quite following - doesn't invalidating the NMG (which is what I expected for large tolerance changes for exactly that reason - shared vertices from multiple faces getting bumped out of planar relationships) prove that the vertex coordinates are being adjusted numerically? Perhaps I'm not doing the correct adjustment (although I'm not 100% sure what "correct" looks like here) but the vertex values are being numerically changed...
Last updated: Oct 09 2024 at 00:44 UTC