I was quickly looking back at the rope soft body when I saw this small glitch in the doc example(s). Because the shape is not closed, the rope appears glitchy (depending on camera angle and rope stretch). You can best see it when looking from the side.
Closing the shape (adding one point at start) solves the problem, as shown here with this quick twist of mine:
‘playground.babylonjs.com/#8WC6ZN#119’
I didn’t want to change the code so I simply added 0.1 to the value of ’ i < 2 * Math.PI ’ to force adding one more point on extrusion. Feel free to do a cleaner code;) and then may be update this part for newcomers.
Thinking of it, there might be others with the same issue (for all or some of .MeshBuilder)…
Edit: this could also be the case with ‘.ExtrudeShape’ used for some of the rope examples. There is something with these constructors and closing path VS not… just something…
What do you mean? These aren’t my playgrounds. They are the ones from the doc.
Simply goto
‘Soft Bodies | Babylon.js Documentation’
and check on the examples with a mesh (in section rope)
I have just updated my posts so now you should have the links.
Incidentally, this simply raises another comment/suggestion of mine. It seems that if I was to simply copy/paste the playground link in the forum (without quotes), the link doesn’t take the # (or something… I didn’t investigate).
Same thing for the code of your playground examples @PirateJC, I’m not really willing to give you the code you will want to showcase for the doc examples (I’m not even sure I have the skills for that yet I just wanted to let you know about the result (glitches). Yours to fix whatever you think needs to be fixed/improved.
Have a great day
Did I just see you implement my ‘hack’/twist ?
Seriously, " for(var i = 0; i < 2 * Math.PI + 0.01; i += Math.PI / 8) " is that the best you engineers can come up with to fix what seems to be an issue (or misunderstanding) with a constructor? Ya know, yours ENGs are sometimes such a bunch of lazy people when you think the topic is ‘too simple’ and can be ‘disregarded’ (hear the love in my voice). Mind your steps ENGs, I can see you
Edit: Sorry, I will have to edit this. After teasing you on your work (this is something we love to do between designers and eng’s don’t we? I thought I would have to do my share and went back this morning looking at these extrusions and I finally saw what you did in the other PGs (or what has been done previously, I don’t know). In fine, it is when you push the points, right?. This is where, you instruct to close the path using
“myShape.push(myShape[0]); //close profile”
as in your PG example
’ https://playground.babylonjs.com/#ZMKN5T#1’
If I was to simply do this “myShape.push”, the profile/path would not close (or else I would need to add the last point and then it would).
Still I don’t find my dirty twist to make a closed circle very sexy (and we should may be add a comment to explain what this value of 0.1 or 0.01 depending on PG example, is actually here for.
Have a great sunday and thanks again for this awesome framework.
You guys rock
I just wanted to let you know about the result (glitches). Yours to fix whatever you think needs to be fixed/improved.
After teasing you on your work (this is something we love to do between designers and eng’s don’t we?
I thought I would have to do my share and went back this morning looking at these extrusions and I finally saw what you did in the other PGs (or what has been done previously, I don’t know). In fine, it is when you push the points, right?. This is where, you instruct to close the path using