[announcement] first version of Toponaming is ready for testing

Here's the place for discussion related to coding in FreeCAD, C++ or Python. Design, interfaces and structures.
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
User avatar
Bernard19
Posts: 887
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:16 pm

Re: [announcement] first version of Toponaming is ready for testing

Post by Bernard19 »

I'm confused.
I have just redone the exercise under FC Topo-Naming and indeed the various modifications are not taken into account.
In my defense, I opened and made modifications under FC Topo-Naming on a file initially created under FC RealThunder.
Cordially
User avatar
Kunda1
Veteran
Posts: 13434
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: [announcement] first version of Toponaming is ready for testing

Post by Kunda1 »

@Bernard19 just to re-iterate: Toponaming fix has been applied to several portions of the code, except the PartDesign workbench. IOW, if you are using PartDesign wb in your testing, it will not have any toponaming fixes yet.
Alone you go faster. Together we go farther
Please mark thread [Solved]
Want to contribute back to FC? Checkout:
'good first issues' | Open TODOs and FIXMEs | How to Help FreeCAD | How to report Bugs
User avatar
uwestoehr
Veteran
Posts: 4961
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 3:21 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

[Meeting minutes] Toponaming is ready for testing

Post by uwestoehr »

Since the release of the first TOponaming build several weeks passed and we got some feedback. TO move on, we had a developer meeting to discuss the technical details and how to move on. TO keep you informed, here are the meeting minutes:

Participants: @realthunder , @saso , @Zolko , @wandererfan , @sliptonic , @chennes , @uwestoehr , @jnxd

Outcome:
- @realthunder will post in this thread what he will do to add more info to the XML output in order to make the XML files better human-readable
- After this change has been made, @realthunder will add the toponaming feature to PartDesign
- then there will be the second release of a toponaming branch build
- about 2 weeks after this release we will meet again to decide the process how to merge toponaming into the master branch
User avatar
obelisk79
Veteran
Posts: 1061
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:01 pm

Re: [announcement] first version of Toponaming is ready for testing

Post by obelisk79 »

@uwestoehr thank you for the updated plan forward.

One question, will the toponaming branch also be synchronized to master soon? It is currently 2200+ commits behind.
User avatar
uwestoehr
Veteran
Posts: 4961
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 3:21 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: [announcement] first version of Toponaming is ready for testing

Post by uwestoehr »

obelisk79 wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 4:01 pm One question, will the toponaming branch also be synchronized to master soon? It is currently 2200+ commits behind.
Not before the release of the second toponaming testing build. As I wrote, the decision how to merge and when will be done in a separate meeting.
User avatar
obelisk79
Veteran
Posts: 1061
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:01 pm

Re: [announcement] first version of Toponaming is ready for testing

Post by obelisk79 »

I must have misunderstood. I assumed you were discussing merging the toponaming branch into master. I was inquiring about backporting the newer commits from master into dev/toponaming since it is so far behind now.

Either way, thank you for the responses. I eagerly await the chance to test the changes once Part Design changes are integrated.
User avatar
Zolko
Veteran
Posts: 2213
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:02 am

Re: [Meeting minutes] Toponaming is ready for testing

Post by Zolko »

uwestoehr wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 3:56 pm Participants: @realthunder , @saso , @Zolko , @wandererfan , @sliptonic , @chennes , @uwestoehr , @jnxd

Outcome:
- @realthunder will post in this thread what he will do to add more info to the XML output in order to make the XML files better human-readable
that's not how I remember it: the Document.xml file (in the FCStd archive) is not the problem, it's human readable, the problem is the accompanying ElementMap files, which are as human-readable as OCC's .brp files are: technically, they're plain text files, but the information they contain are meaningless. But while OCC's BRP files are documented, Toponaming's map files are not.

https://dev.opencascade.org/doc/overvie ... ormat.html
https://documentation.help/Open-Cascade ... ep_wp.html

Code: Select all

BeginElementMap v1
2 PostfixCount 3
Edge
Face
Vertex

MapCount 2

ElementMap 1 3 1

Edge

ChildCount 0

NameCount 5
0
0
0
0
;E4.0 0

EndMap

ElementMap 2 2 3

Edge

ChildCount 1
1 0 18 2344 1 ;:H928,E 0

NameCount 0

Face

ChildCount 1
1 0 8 2344 1 ;:H928,F 0

NameCount 0

Vertex

...
realthunder's argument was that documentation was not needed because the source code was available, while my objection was that in 10 years time, if you wanted to open an old FreeCAD file, the source code for that old version of FreeCAD might not be available. Which means that either the file is self-explanatory and the format can be reverse-engineered easily, or extensive documentation is needed. Bit dumping thousands of lines of random ASCII characters is not acceptable for an open project.

Did someone actually look into the files generated by the toponaming branch ?
try the Assembly4 workbench for FreCAD — tutorials here and here
user1234
Veteran
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 5:08 pm

Re: [announcement] first version of Toponaming is ready for testing

Post by user1234 »

I second obelisk79, since the toponaming branch is that way behind, it is pretty hard to test, because some you can not really evualute, if a symtom is toponaming related. Also i assume, that the merging will be much harder, if it is that way behind (and for me, i need and use all newrst stuff).

Greetings
user1234
chrisb
Veteran
Posts: 53923
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:14 am

Re: [announcement] first version of Toponaming is ready for testing

Post by chrisb »

From what I see, there are very few testers of the toponaming branch until now. That seems to be ok, as there are mere things changed under the hood, which are seemingly not user relevant. However, it is user relevant, that everything else still works.
Thus it seems reasonable to broaden the tester's base by merging the toponaming stuff as soon as possible to master. In the end it would be less work, since merging has to be done only once.

And seeing the big goal, I'm sure that users of the development branch will well accept temporal deteriorations above the usual level.
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
user1234
Veteran
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 5:08 pm

Re: [announcement] first version of Toponaming is ready for testing

Post by user1234 »

chrisb wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 6:47 pm there are very few testers of the toponaming branch until now. That seems to be ok
I think that is not good, but as long it is OK.


chrisb wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 6:47 pm In the end it would be less work, since merging has to be done only once.
I do not thing that is good, since the merge conficts gets bigger and bigger ever commit. This is (at least i think) one (very big one, but not the main) of the main reason, why many other PRs are not merged. I am ont a developer, but at least i can assume that, since while construction, this has similar behaviors.


Greetings
user1234
Post Reply