sketchucation logo sketchucation
    • Login
    ℹ️ Licensed Extensions | FredoBatch, ElevationProfile, FredoSketch, LayOps, MatSim and Pic2Shape will require license from Sept 1st More Info

    PolygonMesh triangulation... ?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Developers' Forum
    23 Posts 6 Posters 2.3k Views 6 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • A Offline
      Anton_S
      last edited by

      It is easy to obtain face triangulation using PolygonMesh. Triangular data is how SketchyPhysics and MSPhysics gather their information about group geometry. Here is a way to gather triangular data from one face:

      triplets = []
      face.mesh.polygons.each_index{ |i|
        triplets << e.mesh.polygon_points_at(i+1)
      }
      

      In this little snippet a triplets array contains triangles of the face. Each triangle represents an array of three Point3d objects.

      Now, this snippet was to get triangular data from single face. But, what if you want to get triangular data from the whole group and what about its sub-groups? Well, it's not easy to write such method, but it's easy to paste it when you have it:

      
      # Get group/component entities.
      # @param [Sketchup;;Group, Sketchup;;ComponentInstance] entity
      # @return [Sketchup;;Entities]
      def get_entities(entity)
        entity.is_a?(Sketchup;;ComponentInstance) ? entity.definition.entities ; entity.entities
      end
      
      # Get triplets from all faces of a group/component.
      # @param [Sketchup;;Group, Sketchup;;ComponentInstance] entity
      # @param [Boolean] recursive Whether to include all the child groups and
      #   components.
      # @param [Boolean] transform Whether to give points in global coordinates.
      # @yield A procedure to determine whether particular child group/component
      #   should be considered a part of the collection.
      # @yieldparam [Sketchup;;Group, Sketchup;;ComponentInstance] entity
      # @yieldreturn [Boolean] Pass true to consider an entity as part of the
      #   collection. Pass false to not consider an entity as part of the
      #   collection.
      # @return [Array<Array<Geom;;Point3d>>] An array of polygons. Each polygon
      #   represents an array of three points - a triplex.
      def get_polygons_from_faces(entity, recursive = true, transform = false, &entity_validation)
        triplets = []
        get_entities(entity).each { |e|
          if e.is_a?(Sketchup;;Face)
            e.mesh.polygons.each_index{ |i|
              triplets << e.mesh.polygon_points_at(i+1)
            }
          elsif recursive && (e.is_a?(Sketchup;;Group) || e.is_a?(Sketchup;;ComponentInstance)) && entity_validation.call(e)
            triplets.concat get_polygons_from_faces(e, true, true, &entity_validation)
          end
        }
        if transform
          tra = entity.transformation
          for i in 0...triplets.size
            triplets[i].each { |pt| pt.transform!(tra) }
          end
        end
        triplets
      end
      
      

      Read the Yardoc generation comments above the method for parameters info. Here is an example:

      group = Sketchup.active_model.entities[0]
      recursive = true # Have geometry gathered from sub group too.
      transform = false # We want our coordinates to be relative to group transformation.
      triplets = get_polygons_from_faces(group, recursive, transform) { |e|
        true # Have every sub-group/sub-component be considered
      }
      
      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • Dan RathbunD Offline
        Dan Rathbun
        last edited by

        This: for i in 0...triplets.size
        will cause a "fence post error" (attempt to read past the last member.)

        Use instead:

            for trip in triplets
              trip.each { |pt| pt.transform!(tra) }
            end
        
        

        There is no sense in using a index when you want the members of the enumerable collection.

        I'm not here much anymore.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • A Offline
          Anton_S
          last edited by

          Nope, it wont. I'm using 3 dots (...), not 2 (..). 3 dots mean n minus 1.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • Dan RathbunD Offline
            Dan Rathbun
            last edited by

            @anton_s said:

            Nope, it wont. I'm using 3 dots (...), not 2 (..). 3 dots mean n minus 1.

            OK, but it's still a bit obscure styling. .. and each iteration you're calling the [] method when you don't need to. Just sayin'

            I'm not here much anymore.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • O Offline
              oajfh
              last edited by

              Thanks again for the replies !

              Anton, your piece of code that constructs a mesh is exactly what I was looking for. I'd tried a couple of things that weren't too different in their approach, but your code handles Transformations really cleanly.

              On a side note, you do need to add an extra check at the beginning of your get_triangular_mesh, otherwise it will fail as Edge objects do not have an 'entities' method.

              On another side note, in another approach I'd had, I used Sketchup::Set instances to store points and make sure I wasn't getting multiple objects which actually referred to the same point. Strangely enough, the Sketchup::Set does manage to get unique points, but the Object::Set does not - I guess the Sketchup::Set used something other than hashes and eql? to compare points. Yet the Sketchup API directs users to the Object::Set class since Sketchup::Set is now deprecated. Aren't there going to be compatibility issues if users create Sets of points ?

              Anyway, thanks again for the answers. Dan, the tips you gave me will also definitely come in handy when I start optimizing my bad Ruby code.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • A Offline
                Anton_S
                last edited by

                @dan rathbun said:

                OK, but it's still a bit obscure styling. .. and each iteration you're calling the [] method when you don't need to. Just sayin'

                I think that each loop is slower than for loop. That's why I used for loop.

                @oajfh said:

                On a side note, you do need to add an extra check at the beginning of your get_triangular_mesh, otherwise it will fail as Edge objects do not have an 'entities' method.

                I had these in checkers. I just removed them because these checkers were from other functions, which I did not wan't to paste because they would have probably made the code a bit confusing:

                # Validate object type.
                # @param [Object] object
                # @param [Object, Array<Object>] types An object or an array of objects to
                #   check against.
                # @return [void]
                # @raise [TypeError] if object class doesn't match with any of the specified
                #   types.
                def validate_type(object, *types)
                  types = types.flatten
                  return if types.empty?
                  types.each { |type| return if object.is_a?(type) }
                  string = case types.size
                  when 1
                    types[0]
                  when 2
                    "#{types[0]} or #{types[1]}"
                  else
                    "#{types[0...-1].join(', ')}, or #{types[-1]}"
                  end
                  raise TypeError, "Expected #{string}, but got #{object.class}.", caller
                end
                
                def get_triangular_mesh(entity, recursive = true, transform = false, &entity_validation)
                  validate_type(entity, ;;Sketchup;;Group, ;;Sketchup;;ComponentInstance)
                  mesh = Geom;;PolygonMesh.new
                  get_entities(entity).each { |e|
                    if e.is_a?(;;Sketchup;;Face)
                      e.mesh.polygons.each_index{ |i|
                        pts = e.mesh.polygon_points_at(i+1)
                        mesh.add_polygon(pts)
                      }
                    elsif recursive && (e.is_a?(;;Sketchup;;Group) || e.is_a?(;;Sketchup;;ComponentInstance)) && entity_validation.call(e)
                      mesh2 = get_triangular_mesh(e, true, true, &entity_validation)
                      mesh2.polygons.each_index { |i|
                        mesh.add_polygon(mesh2.polygon_points_at(i+1))
                      }
                    end
                  }
                  mesh.transform!(entity.transformation) if transform
                  mesh
                end
                

                On another side, I know nothing about Sketchup::Set or Object::Set, although I do recall reading a thread mentioning them. I'm pretty sure other developers have good knowledge of them.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • fredo6F Offline
                  fredo6
                  last edited by

                  @anton_s said:

                  I think that each loop is slower than for loop. That's why I used for loop.

                  Not so sure in Ruby 2.x. See this interesting benchmark.

                  It is also said that the fastest is the while loop, when this is appropriate.

                  Fredo

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Dan RathbunD Offline
                    Dan Rathbun
                    last edited by

                    BUT.. that is not the point I was making. You do not need to mess with an index, in order to iterate the members of an Enumerable collection.

                    Restated and simplified, as this:

                        for t in triplets
                          t.each { |pt| pt.transform!(tra) }
                        end
                    
                    

                    is faster and more readable (better practice) than:

                        for i in 0...triplets.size
                          triplets[i].each { |pt| pt.transform!(tra) }
                        end
                    
                    

                    Why faster?

                    • No calling the size method at the beginning.
                    • No instantiation of a Range object via the ... operator
                    • No need to call the [] method during each iteration.

                    There is no sense in using a index when you want the members of the enumerable collection.
                    Because, the for loop can directly serve up each enumerable member in turn, without the need to maintain an index variable on the Ruby side.

                    (Of course the C-side implementation using for over there does use an iterator, but the C-side does not need to expose the iterator to the Ruby side.)

                    The for construct is not a method it's built into Ruby. And it does not create a new scope during each iteration. I image that other built-in looping constructs ( while, until) can also be fast.

                    I'm not here much anymore.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • Dan RathbunD Offline
                      Dan Rathbun
                      last edited by

                      @fredo6 said:

                      @anton_s said:

                      I think that each loop is slower than for loop. That's why I used for loop.

                      Not so sure in Ruby 2.x. See this interesting benchmark.

                      It is also said that the fastest is the while loop, when this is appropriate.

                      Well that is interesting. Seems they optimized while and each, but not for.
                      So now we have a quandary if we publish for older SketchUps, with older Ruby.

                      I'm not here much anymore.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • thomthomT Offline
                        thomthom
                        last edited by

                        IN Ruby 1.8 for loops used to be faster - at least in the tests I performed on my extensions. But Ruby 2.0 swapped that around.

                        In any case - you don't really know until you profile your specific case.

                        Thomas Thomassen — SketchUp Monkey & Coding addict
                        List of my plugins and link to the CookieWare fund

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • 1
                        • 2
                        • 2 / 2
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        Buy SketchPlus
                        Buy SUbD
                        Buy WrapR
                        Buy eBook
                        Buy Modelur
                        Buy Vertex Tools
                        Buy SketchCuisine
                        Buy FormFonts

                        Advertisement