#Openscad $fn full#
#Openscad $fn software#

#Openscad $fn full#

I can't find a pic of the full truck, but here are some samples:Īnyway, as much as I enjoyed creating the truck, the reality is that a decent mechanical engineer, experienced in SolidWorks, CATIA, or other parametric CAD, could have built the truck in a fraction of the time that it took me. My entry was a library that could generate Lego pieces, which I used to build a Lego truck. My last job, at a CAD company, we had a competition to see who could create the coolest models programmatically using the new Javascript based scripting language we were creating. Antimony and/or its descendents may be able to help out with that. Constraint debugging in parametric CAD can occasionally be a frustrating kind of hell. Over time, it's UI might be able to converge functionally to the mature CAD packages, but allow for greater insight into how the engine is really building up the model, especially in complex projects. At first blush, it looks far more appealing than OpenSCAD for practical applications.

That said, I'm actually quite interested to play with Antimony. Parametric CAD is far better about keeping relevant dimension values, formulas, and model constraints right where they're relevant and trivial to visually comprehend in terms of their function in the model.Ī better analogy for the uninitiated would be the frustration of a spreadsheet where the cell values and formulas had to be edited on some entirely separate text code UI sheet, requiring flipping back and forth and holding stuff in short-term memory to do anything to the model.

But that's an utterly terrible analogy to parametric CAD, which is really a touch closer to a kind of end-user programming language.

#Openscad $fn software#

On the software side, I'm one of those who generally prefers code vs. Being a career software developer who has recently learned to use parametric CAD (specifically, Geomagic Design, formerly known as Alibre Design), this is just not true.