openscad-cpp-evaluator 0.23.0__tar.gz → 0.24.0__tar.gz

{openscad_cpp_evaluator-0.23.0 → openscad_cpp_evaluator-0.24.0}/PKG-INFO

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Metadata-Version: 2.4
 Name: openscad_cpp_evaluator
-Version: 0.23.0
+Version: 0.24.0
 Summary: C++ OpenSCAD evaluator with Python bindings
 Author: NeuSCAD Contributors
 License-Expression: MIT

{openscad_cpp_evaluator-0.23.0 → openscad_cpp_evaluator-0.24.0}/include/openscad_cpp_evaluator/mesh_check.hpp

@@ -34,9 +34,13 @@ struct MeshDiagnosis {
     size_t unweldedVertices = 0;
 
     bool watertight() const { return boundaryEdges == 0; }
+    // Topology only. Zero-area faces are deliberately not part of this: a
+    // mesh full of slivers can be a perfectly good closed manifold, and CSG
+    // routinely emits them -- a level-4 Menger sponge has 14. They are worth
+    // reporting, because some slicers drop them and are then left with real
+    // holes, but calling such a mesh "not manifold" is simply wrong.
     bool manifold() const {
-        return boundaryEdges == 0 && nonManifoldEdges == 0 && pinchedVertices == 0
-               && degenerateFaces == 0;
+        return boundaryEdges == 0 && nonManifoldEdges == 0 && pinchedVertices == 0;
     }
     bool orientable() const { return inconsistentEdges == 0; }
     bool ok() const { return manifold() && orientable(); }

{openscad_cpp_evaluator-0.23.0 → openscad_cpp_evaluator-0.24.0}/pyproject.toml

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ build-backend = "scikit_build_core.build"
 
 [project]
 name = "openscad_cpp_evaluator"
-version = "0.23.0"
+version = "0.24.0"
 description = "C++ OpenSCAD evaluator with Python bindings"
 readme = "README.md"
 requires-python = ">=3.12"

{openscad_cpp_evaluator-0.23.0 → openscad_cpp_evaluator-0.24.0}/src/mesh_check.cpp

@@ -29,6 +29,14 @@ void pos(const manifold::MeshGL& m, Vert v, double out[3]) {
     for (int i = 0; i < 3; ++i) out[i] = m.vertProperties[v * stride + i];
 }
 
+// A face naming the same vertex twice. Its "edges" include a self-edge, so
+// it cannot take part in the topology at all.
+bool repeatsAVertex(const manifold::MeshGL& m, size_t t) {
+    Vert v[3];
+    triVerts(m, t, v);
+    return v[0] == v[1] || v[1] == v[2] || v[0] == v[2];
+}
+
 bool degenerate(const manifold::MeshGL& m, size_t t) {
     Vert v[3];
     triVerts(m, t, v);
@@ -136,10 +144,16 @@ MeshDiagnosis checkMesh(const manifold::MeshGL& mesh) {
     std::set<std::array<Vert, 3>> seenFaces;
 
     for (size_t t = 0; t < tris; ++t) {
-        if (degenerate(mesh, t)) {
-            ++d.degenerateFaces;
-            continue;               // its edges are meaningless
-        }
+        if (degenerate(mesh, t)) ++d.degenerateFaces;
+        // Counted, but NOT removed from the topology. A zero-area triangle
+        // is still a face with three edges, and dropping it leaves those
+        // edges with one face each -- which then reads as a hole that is
+        // not there. A level-4 Menger sponge is manifold with every face
+        // present and reported 722 boundary edges without them.
+        //
+        // A face naming the same vertex twice is different: its self-edge
+        // cannot be matched by anything, so it genuinely has to go.
+        if (repeatsAVertex(mesh, t)) continue;
         Vert v[3];
         triVerts(mesh, t, v);
 

{openscad_cpp_evaluator-0.23.0 → openscad_cpp_evaluator-0.24.0}/tests/test_mesh_check.cpp

@@ -97,6 +97,47 @@ TEST(MeshCheck, DegenerateAndDuplicateFacesAreReportedSeparately) {
     EXPECT_EQ(d.duplicateFaces, 1u) << d.summary();
 }
 
+// A sliver is still a face. Dropping zero-area triangles before building
+// the edge map leaves their edges with one face each, which reads as a hole
+// that is not there -- a level-4 Menger sponge is manifold with every face
+// present and reported 722 boundary edges without them.
+TEST(MeshCheck, AZeroAreaFaceIsReportedWithoutInventingHoles) {
+    // A closed cube whose top face is fanned through Q, a point sitting
+    // exactly on the diagonal 4-6. That makes face {4,8,6} zero-area while
+    // every edge it owns is still shared with a real neighbour -- which is
+    // the shape CSG actually produces. Drop the sliver and edges 4-8, 8-6
+    // and 4-6 each lose a face, so three holes appear that were never there.
+    manifold::MeshGL m = build(
+        {0, 0, 0,  1, 0, 0,  1, 1, 0,  0, 1, 0,
+         0, 0, 1,  1, 0, 1,  1, 1, 1,  0, 1, 1,
+         0.5f, 0.5f, 1},                      // 8: on the diagonal 4-6
+        {
+            0, 2, 1,  0, 3, 2,                // bottom
+            4, 5, 8,  5, 6, 8,  4, 8, 6,      // top, fanned; {4,8,6} is the sliver
+            4, 6, 7,
+            0, 1, 5,  0, 5, 4,                // sides
+            1, 2, 6,  1, 6, 5,
+            2, 3, 7,  2, 7, 6,
+            3, 0, 4,  3, 4, 7,
+        });
+    const MeshDiagnosis d = checkMesh(m);
+    EXPECT_EQ(d.degenerateFaces, 1u) << "fixture has no sliver: " << d.summary();
+    EXPECT_EQ(d.boundaryEdges, 0u)
+        << "dropping the sliver invented holes: " << d.summary();
+    EXPECT_TRUE(d.watertight()) << d.summary();
+}
+
+// A face naming the same vertex twice is different: its self-edge cannot be
+// matched by anything, so it does have to leave the topology.
+TEST(MeshCheck, AFaceWithARepeatedVertexIsExcludedFromTheTopology) {
+    manifold::MeshGL m = tetra();
+    m.triVerts.insert(m.triVerts.end(), {0u, 1u, 1u});
+    const MeshDiagnosis d = checkMesh(m);
+    EXPECT_EQ(d.degenerateFaces, 1u) << d.summary();
+    EXPECT_EQ(d.boundaryEdges, 0u) << "its self-edge leaked in: " << d.summary();
+    EXPECT_TRUE(d.watertight()) << d.summary();
+}
+
 TEST(MeshCheck, CoincidentButDistinctVerticesAreReported) {
     manifold::MeshGL m = tetra();
     m.vertProperties.insert(m.vertProperties.end(), {0, 0, 0});   // copy of vertex 0