Hi Felix,

> Could this relatively large limit of 0.001 unit come from
> the origin of the code in the library?

Not really - I mean 1/1000th of a unit is what I'd consider pretty small, I have a hard time viewing that as "relatively large" myself...

Various different processes need to carry out their calculations until they reach a particular accuracy level which they can then judge to be good enough. If that accuracy level is set to be too high, then those processes will both take a lot of extra time and also generate much more dense results for things like intersection curve results, etc...

I am generally moving things towards a system that uses a relative fraction of the object's bounding size rather than a fixed tolerance size though. But that can still be problematic when you've got just some little tiny portion of the object being a small size.


> In the 70s 8 bit processor was the norm but today even a
> 32 bit app should be able to go way behond this.

Not really - I mean with a simple object it would be possible but it would not work well to say make everything 20 times larger in data size, it would especially really cause a problem with models that are already of a high complexity as it is.


If you're unioning a whole lot of things together in one pass you may also get some better results by only selecting 2 pieces at a time - sometimes union can have some additional difficulty if you've selected some large number of separate pieces and it happens to process some pairs that do not actually touch each other first. It will try to sort things so that if you have one large object and a bunch of small ones touching it, that it will do the large one first so they'll all be intersecting but if you have a whole lot of daisy-chained type same size pieces you may need to select them 2 at time, at least that's worth a try if you run into a problem.


> It would be nice to kind of group all those items into an
> assembled door and work with this "door" as a single object
> while still have access to individual parts of the door with
> there own individual name. I think you mentioned that you
> wanted to work on something like that in the future, can we
> hope for this in V3?

Yup, that is something that I want to work on in v3 - basically a group mechanism will be a way to have a hierarchy of names that you'll be able to expand and collapse.

- Michael