On 2016-03-09 00:59, Neon22 wrote: > I may be incorrect but I think having the minkowski is one of the only > reasons (and hull) we still use nef_polyhedron and the CGAL. I mean the > difficulty in coding a replacement in a faster library... > However - its hard to give up the minkowski... its seductive.... > > and the hull is fantastically useful of course. Not sure about minkowski, but for hull you don't need CGAL. Carsten Arnholm

I've used Minkowski for making bevelled indents for cookie stamps: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:199200 And for making bevelled text: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:865304 And bevelled edges on a maze: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:212652 ... in short, I use it a bit like a chisel. I have yet to find a use for it beyond making edges look nicer, though. -- View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/Does-Minkowski-work-only-in-2d-tp16334p16369.html Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

>It's usually easier to use cylinders and spheres and hull() in my experience - and a ton faster. You can only do that when the object is convex and that is now exactly what OpenScad does internally for convex shapes with Mincowkski. It doesn't use CGAL unless you do a convex shape. On 9 March 2016 at 09:02, David Eccles (gringer) < bioinformatics@gringene.org> wrote: > I've used Minkowski for making bevelled indents for cookie stamps: > > http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:199200 > > And for making bevelled text: > > http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:865304 > > And bevelled edges on a maze: > > http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:212652 > > ... in short, I use it a bit like a chisel. I have yet to find a use for it > beyond making edges look nicer, though. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.openscad.org/Does-Minkowski-work-only-in-2d-tp16334p16369.html > Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > OpenSCAD mailing list > Discuss@lists.openscad.org > http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org >

On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 10:00:23 +0000 nop head <nop.head@gmail.com> wrote: > >It's usually easier to use cylinders and spheres and hull() in my > experience - and a ton faster. > > You can only do that when the object is convex and that is now exactly what > OpenScad does internally for convex shapes with Mincowkski. It doesn't use > CGAL unless you do a convex shape. I do it for quite a few concave objects by doing them in bits and unioning. Tedious but sometimes needed. Sounds like I need to update my OpenSCAD if convex Minkowski is now done with hull() automatically. Thanks Alan

> On Mar 9, 2016, at 05:06 AM, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote: > > Sounds like I need to update my OpenSCAD if convex Minkowski is now done > with hull() automatically. > ..since 2015.03. -Marius