| ▲ | wren6991 an hour ago | |
If you look at this and you think "wow, I love the idea of CAD-as-code but I wish it was a more sane language" then have a look at CadQuery: https://cadquery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/quickstart.html#qu... (I recommend CQ-editor for an easy install: https://github.com/CadQuery/CQ-editor/releases/) It's a similar idea to OpenSCAD, but embedded in Python and using a better geometry kernel. Want to fillet a box in OpenSCAD? Sure, either take the convex hull of 8 spheres, or the minkowski sum of a box and a sphere. Want to fillet a box in CadQuery? .edges().fillet() Now I'm hearing some protests about Python, but consider this example OpenSCAD code:
In most languages you would expect this to print "1". In OpenSCAD, the last assignment wins and it prints "2". | ||
| ▲ | retatop an hour ago | parent [-] | |
I certainly have my complaints about openscad (mostly that the geometry isn't something you can operate on), but as far as I'm concerned a declarative language is perfect for describing an object. I don't want your example to do what you expect. I would have preferred if it didn't compile | ||