From david.thompson at kitware.com Fri Oct 9 10:05:17 2015 From: david.thompson at kitware.com (David Thompson) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 10:05:17 -0400 Subject: [Smtk-developers] Polygonal modeling question Message-ID: <7B990846-D342-4FDA-B81E-BD0DB060D59B@kitware.com> Hi Bob, I have a question about eliminating edges only used by small loops which we wish to kill. I'm working on a sweepline algorithm to discern loops and nesting incrementally and the attached picture (which is like the one you drew in the CMB core meeting) shows a conundrum when sweeping left-to-right... when I get to point E (where the small loop b-C-E-b is closed by the algorithm) should I eliminate edge C-E or edge C-b-E? Similarly, at point F, should I eliminate E-F or E-d-F? The decisions are arbitrary, although my best guess is that the edges with the shorter arc-length should be kept (minimizing curvature energy seems consistent with eliminating loops with small areas). You had mentioned eliminating edges unused by other loops, but the sweepline algorithm won't necessarily have other loops determined yet. David -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: loop-conundrum.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 18669 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bob.obara at kitware.com Fri Oct 9 10:59:05 2015 From: bob.obara at kitware.com (Robert Michael O'Bara) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 10:59:05 -0400 Subject: [Smtk-developers] Polygonal modeling question In-Reply-To: <7B990846-D342-4FDA-B81E-BD0DB060D59B@kitware.com> References: <7B990846-D342-4FDA-B81E-BD0DB060D59B@kitware.com> Message-ID: Hi David, Excellant question. Either removal would result in loop elimination. I guess one way of discriminating the two would be based on lengths (assuming we are removing ?high? frequency edges). We could choose to keep the shorter of the two edge choices so in that case edge CE and EF would be kept over the other edges. Does that make sense? Bob Robert M. O'Bara, MEng. Assistant Director of Scientific Computing Kitware Inc. 28 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Clifton Park, NY 12065 Phone: (518) 881- 4931 > On Oct 9, 2015, at 10:05 AM, David Thompson wrote: > > Hi Bob, > > I have a question about eliminating edges only used by small loops which we wish to kill. I'm working on a sweepline algorithm to discern loops and nesting incrementally and the attached picture (which is like the one you drew in the CMB core meeting) shows a conundrum when sweeping left-to-right... when I get to point E (where the small loop b-C-E-b is closed by the algorithm) should I eliminate edge C-E or edge C-b-E? Similarly, at point F, should I eliminate E-F or E-d-F? The decisions are arbitrary, although my best guess is that the edges with the shorter arc-length should be kept (minimizing curvature energy seems consistent with eliminating loops with small areas). > > You had mentioned eliminating edges unused by other loops, but the sweepline algorithm won't necessarily have other loops determined yet. > > David > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bob.obara at kitware.com Mon Oct 12 16:48:37 2015 From: bob.obara at kitware.com (Robert Michael O'Bara) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 16:48:37 -0400 Subject: [Smtk-developers] [SMTK] Remove usage of removed vtksys:: stringstream's. (#286) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hey Rob, I don?t know what is going on but this was fixed as of Friday afternoon in my merge requests concerning ParaView Master support for CMB. Has these branches still not merged?? Bob Robert M. O'Bara, MEng. Assistant Director of Scientific Computing Kitware Inc. 28 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Clifton Park, NY 12065 Phone: (518) 881- 4931 > On Oct 12, 2015, at 3:41 PM, Robert Maynard wrote: > > vtksys/kwsys has removed all stringstream classes, as all support versions > of the C++ standard library now include them. > > You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: > > https://github.com/Kitware/SMTK/pull/286 > Commit Summary > > Remove usage of removed vtksys:: stringstream's. > File Changes > > M smtk/bridge/discrete/extension/reader/vtkCUBITReader.cxx (2) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/Serialize/vtkModelXMLParser.cxx (4) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/Serialize/vtkXMLArchiveReader.cxx (4) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/Serialize/vtkXMLArchiveWriter.cxx (8) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/Serialize/vtkXMLArchiveWriter.h (2) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/Serialize/vtkXMLElement.cxx (22) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/vtkDiscreteModelWrapper.cxx (6) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/vtkXMLModelReader.cxx (8) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/vtkXMLModelWriter.cxx (6) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/vtkXMLModelWriter.h (6) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/CMBModel/Plugin/vtkCMBImportBCFileOperatorClient.cxx (2) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/CMBModel/Plugin/vtkCMBModelBuilder2DClient.cxx (4) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/CMBModel/Plugin/vtkCMBModelBuilderClient.cxx (4) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/CMBModel/Plugin/vtkGeoTransformOperatorClient.cxx (2) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/SimBuilderMesh/vtkCMBMeshGridRepresentationClient.cxx (2) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/SimBuilderMesh/vtkCMBMeshWrapper.cxx (2) > M smtk/bridge/discrete/operation/testing/cxx/DiscreteSerializationTest.cxx (8) > Patch Links: > > https://github.com/Kitware/SMTK/pull/286.patch > https://github.com/Kitware/SMTK/pull/286.diff > ? > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub . > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From robert.maynard at kitware.com Tue Oct 13 08:27:16 2015 From: robert.maynard at kitware.com (Robert Maynard) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:27:16 -0400 Subject: [Smtk-developers] [SMTK] Remove usage of removed vtksys:: stringstream's. (#286) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yes this looks to duplicate changes that have been merged in, I was working on a stale smtk. On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Robert Michael O'Bara < bob.obara at kitware.com> wrote: > Hey Rob, > > I don?t know what is going on but this was fixed as of Friday afternoon in > my merge requests concerning ParaView Master support for CMB. > > Has these branches still not merged?? > > Bob > > Robert M. O'Bara, MEng. > Assistant Director of Scientific Computing > > Kitware Inc. > 28 Corporate Drive > Suite 101 > Clifton Park, NY 12065 > > Phone: (518) 881- 4931 > > > > > On Oct 12, 2015, at 3:41 PM, Robert Maynard > wrote: > > vtksys/kwsys has removed all stringstream classes, as all support versions > of the C++ standard library now include them. > ------------------------------ > You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: > > https://github.com/Kitware/SMTK/pull/286 > Commit Summary > > - Remove usage of removed vtksys:: stringstream's. > > File Changes > > - *M* smtk/bridge/discrete/extension/reader/vtkCUBITReader.cxx > (2) > - *M* smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/Serialize/vtkModelXMLParser.cxx > (4) > - *M* smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/Serialize/vtkXMLArchiveReader.cxx > (4) > - *M* smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/Serialize/vtkXMLArchiveWriter.cxx > (8) > - *M* smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/Serialize/vtkXMLArchiveWriter.h > (2) > - *M* smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/Serialize/vtkXMLElement.cxx > (22) > - *M* smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/vtkDiscreteModelWrapper.cxx > (6) > - *M* smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/vtkXMLModelReader.cxx > (8) > - *M* smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/vtkXMLModelWriter.cxx > (6) > - *M* smtk/bridge/discrete/kernel/vtkXMLModelWriter.h > (6) > - *M* > smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/CMBModel/Plugin/vtkCMBImportBCFileOperatorClient.cxx > (2) > - *M* > smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/CMBModel/Plugin/vtkCMBModelBuilder2DClient.cxx > (4) > - *M* > smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/CMBModel/Plugin/vtkCMBModelBuilderClient.cxx > (4) > - *M* > smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/CMBModel/Plugin/vtkGeoTransformOperatorClient.cxx > (2) > - *M* > smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/SimBuilderMesh/vtkCMBMeshGridRepresentationClient.cxx > (2) > - *M* > smtk/bridge/discrete/legacycmb/SimBuilderMesh/vtkCMBMeshWrapper.cxx > (2) > - *M* > smtk/bridge/discrete/operation/testing/cxx/DiscreteSerializationTest.cxx > (8) > > Patch Links: > > - https://github.com/Kitware/SMTK/pull/286.patch > - https://github.com/Kitware/SMTK/pull/286.diff > > ? > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub > . > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From david.thompson at kitware.com Mon Oct 26 12:17:17 2015 From: david.thompson at kitware.com (David Thompson) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 12:17:17 -0400 Subject: [Smtk-developers] Changes to Exodus session Message-ID: Hi all, I've merged some changes to SMTK master that change the way the Exodus session works. These changes were made to support loading files other than Exodus files. In particular, SLAC NetCDF files may also be loaded now. It should be simpler to add support for more filetypes that VTK supports going forwards. David From david.thompson at kitware.com Fri Oct 30 12:21:32 2015 From: david.thompson at kitware.com (David Thompson) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:21:32 -0400 Subject: [Smtk-developers] First part of polygon modeling session merged Message-ID: Hi all, I've merged the progress on the polygon modeler to master. It also fixes some issues in smtkCore related to bit-masks specified in operator XML, which may have contributed to the problem Bob had with ModelBuilder not allowing attribute associations. Face creation is not available yet, but model, vertex, and edge creation work and should be usable in ModelBuilder. David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: creation.png Type: image/png Size: 1731 bytes Desc: not available URL: