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.

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

Locking vertices and edges instead/in addition to the selection #34

Closed
j8asic opened this issue Jul 29, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

Locking vertices and edges instead/in addition to the selection #34

j8asic opened this issue Jul 29, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@j8asic
Copy link

j8asic commented Jul 29, 2020

In function SurfaceRemeshing::preprocessing(), locked property is forcefully added as follows:

    vlocked_ = mesh_.add_vertex_property<bool>("v:locked", false);
    elocked_ = mesh_.add_edge_property<bool>("e:locked", false);

It would be convenient if the property is added only if it doesn't exist, so that users themselves can lock vertices and edges, instead of selecting remeshable vertices. So this locked property may be used later for future mesh manipulations, not only for remeshing. Something like:

    vlocked_ = mesh_.vertex_property<bool>("v:locked", false);
    elocked_ = mesh_.edge_property<bool>("e:locked", false);

And locked property should not get deleted in postprocessing functions. Also, "locked" would have greater priority than "selected".

Just a suggestion... Don't know if it makes sense... I agree that users can manipulate selections before an operation.

@dsieger
Copy link
Member

dsieger commented Aug 3, 2020

Hi,

Thanks for your suggestion. I am hesitating a bit though. It seems this would be an alternative way to achieve the same result as currently possible through the selection property. For sake of simplicity, we generally prefer to have a single way to achieve a certain result.

However, I do agree that our "implicit" usage of internal properties is not optimal, and we might change this in a future release.

Thanks,
Daniel

@dsieger
Copy link
Member

dsieger commented Nov 8, 2020

Re-visiting this issue: We'll keep things simple and consistent: Using selections is the way to restrict the application of an algorithm. It's already used in several places. Introducing another way to achieve the same result would lead to additional maintenance burden and potential issues (prioritization of selection vs locking).

Thanks,
Daniel

@dsieger dsieger closed this as completed Nov 8, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants