[Wire Shape] Fix the confusion between the nbEdgesCollision and the number of mechanical Beams#177
Merged
epernod merged 3 commits intoApr 25, 2025
Conversation
fredroy
added
pr: fix
pr: clean
pr: status to review
fredroy
force-pushed
the
beam_description_mecha_collis_split
branch
from
e1bf390 to
1a7d237
Compare
epernod
approved these changes
Apr 24, 2025
| if(!d_nbBeams.isSet()) | ||
| { | ||
| msg_deprecated() << "nbBeams is now required but it was not set. Its value will be copied from nbEdgesCollis as a temporary compatibility solution."; | ||
| d_nbBeams.setValue(d_nbEdgesCollis.getValue()); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
aha ok! I was wondering how the regression could pass with such a change if you don't update the scenes.
Contributor
Author
I dont see the problem having more beams than collision edges 🤔 |
fredroy
force-pushed
the
beam_description_mecha_collis_split
branch
from
b4ab71a to
0f97329
Compare
epernod
added
pr: status ready
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In a nutshell, there is a confusion in the description of a tool, where nbEdgesCollision set the number of mechanical beams...
So in the end the number of beams will be the same as the number of collision edges.
It is especially problematic where you want a certain part of your tool to be more "collidable" but it does not necessarily need more "beams".
There is a little compat part if a user did not specify "nbBeams", it will take the value of nbEdgesCollision (like it is now)