[MOAB-dev] OBBTreeTool Settings - Set Options

[Patrick Shriwise]

Hi Iulian,

I don't know that its a problem. Mostly just trying to determine its 
purpose with respect to the OBBTree, and was wondering if as a result of 
the discussion we might conclude that it should always be MESHSET_SET.

I think you're right about the tracking of entities within leaf nodes 
for dynamic meshes. A triangle entity could also then be used to gain 
access to its leaf node if desired.

Maybe my real concern is with passing the Settings structure as a whole 
to the build method. Could these settings (or the entire settings 
structure itself) be members OBBTreeTool class? It seems clunky to be 
passing around a structure like that from method to method, but maybe 
there's a reason for this as well.


Patrick C. Shriwise
Research Fellow
University of Wisconsin - Madison
Engineering Research Building - Rm. 428
1500 Engineering Drive
Madison, WI 53706
(608) 446-8173

On 1/5/17 3:30 PM, Grindeanu, Iulian R. wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
> I am not sure what is the problem. Do you think we should not allow the setting of the mesh set type?
> Currently, none of our use cases modifies the set type.
> So do you think it should be made by default with MESHSET_SET always?
>
> Tracking option would be useful maybe if the tree is more "dynamic", I mean if it is used in an application for which the mesh is not fixed . For example during mesh generation, or some AMR (). In that case, as elements are added/removed/deleted during mesh (re) generation, it would be useful if the element is removed automatically from the set (when deleted).  or maybe even the order in which they are added to the set is important?
>
> Again, why is this setting a problem? Does it complicate the api too much? maybe python bindings become too complex?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Iulian
> ________________________________________
> From: moab-dev-bounces at mcs.anl.gov [moab-dev-bounces at mcs.anl.gov] on behalf of shriwise [shriwise at wisc.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2017 1:02 PM
> To: moab-dev at mcs.anl.gov
> Subject: Re: [MOAB-dev] OBBTreeTool Settings - Set Options
>
> To be clear, I mean the setting of MeshSet options within the context of
> use in OBBTrees.
>
> Patrick C. Shriwise
> Research Fellow
> University of Wisconsin - Madison
> Engineering Research Building - Rm. 428
> 1500 Engineering Drive
> Madison, WI 53706
> (608) 446-8173
>
> On 01/05/2017 12:38 PM, shriwise wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm currently in the process of refactoring the OBBTreeTool and I'm
>> finding that the allowance for control of node MeshSet options is
>> problematic in making the code more modular and accessible to other
>> applications.
>>
>> Can someone elaborate on why this feature is part of the interface? In
>> particular, I'm having trouble picturing cases in which you would like
>> entities to track their owner. I can understand why it might be useful
>> to have ordered entities in leaf MeshSets, but the tool isn't
>> currently designed to take advantage of such ordering.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Patrick
>>