Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Implement geometric validation #613

Closed
hannobraun opened this issue May 20, 2022 · 3 comments
Closed

Implement geometric validation #613

hannobraun opened this issue May 20, 2022 · 3 comments
Labels
topic: core Issues relating to core geometry, operations, algorithms type: development Work to ease development or maintenance, without direct effect on features or bugs

Comments

@hannobraun
Copy link
Owner

hannobraun commented May 20, 2022 •
edited
Loading

We already have lots of validation infrastructure. The bulk of it does structural validation: Making sure that any other objects that a topological object refers to, are actually part of the same shape.

Geometric validation makes sure that geometric constraints are satisfied:

  • That the vertices that bound an edge are actually on the edge's curve.
  • That the cycles that bound a face are actually on the face's surface.
  • That the local and canonical forms of any referenced objects match.

And many more. I think for a start, it would be enough to address these items. We can later extend the validation infrastructure as needed. I don't think this is a hard task, since geometric validation should slot right into the existing validation infrastructure. However, it might surface existing bugs that are not easy to fix, which might complicate things.

As part of my work on #568, I'm currently tracking down a bug that is caused by a geometric constraint violation. I'm observing this bug in my local branch, and I don't know if it's actually present in main (which means my local changes just surfaced it), or if I introduced it in my local branch. Either way, having geometric validation implemented will help me with that bug, and prevent others like it in the future

I'm going to start working on this immediately, before continuing my work on #568.
@hannobraun hannobraun added type: development Work to ease development or maintenance, without direct effect on features or bugs topic: core Issues relating to core geometry, operations, algorithms labels May 20, 2022
@hannobraun hannobraun self-assigned this May 20, 2022
This was referenced May 23, 2022
Merged
Merged
Closed
Merged
@hannobraun
Copy link
Owner Author

I've made the first step towards this in #626, where I implemented validation of edge vertices. This has actually already helped me solve the problem that motivated this work in the first place. In addition, further work will benefit from #568 fully being in place, which is why I'm leaving this for now.

I have no specific plans on when to pick this back up. It will probably happen whenever I run into another problem that I think this will fix. I'm going to leave this issue attached to the milestone for now, although I'm not sure about that. I might remove it later.

@hannobraun hannobraun removed their assignment May 24, 2022
@hannobraun
Copy link
Owner Author

I'm removing this issue from the milestone, as it no longer directly affects its goals.

@hannobraun
Copy link
Owner Author

Closing in favor of #1129.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
topic: core Issues relating to core geometry, operations, algorithms type: development Work to ease development or maintenance, without direct effect on features or bugs
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@hannobraun