Post

is it a good idea? unclear! but I think separating "generate surface points" from "stitch them together into the output mesh" is an interesting kernel of an idea

Generating points on the intersection between two+ surfaces (to get nice edges/corners) is one way where this gets you into trouble, because the geometry itself is incredibly nasty

I don’t think it’s quite equivalent – having tet vertices tagged as inside/outside/surface makes it easier to tell where you need to refine further, compared to a raw point cloud

Oh man. I published some very old work in the area 20 years ago and this area is a mine field. It’s a fractal of corner cases all fighting you. In the middle of really nasty optimization, geometry/topology methods while also dealing with numerics. It’s a nightmare

It does not seem directly relevant but since you’re a modeling nerd I thought I would pass along this neat paper I’ve been using to build my CAD kernel. It’s BREP not implicit but perhaps thought provoking. bsky.app/profile/sequ...

Thanks! Ya the kernel is still very early but it is an implementation of this paper which offers a simpler method of performing booleans than more common approaches, which makes it tractable. Claude did all the heavy lifting, which is also what makes this tractable. dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1...

Ah yes, "We have simplified BREP intersection by reducing it to mesh intersection", a famously easy problem 😛 (this looks great, thanks for sharing it)