Suggested doc updates - issues for finalised words, here for discussion on draft words?

[Anthony Tan]

Not sure if this is the best forum so redirect me if not but was just playing with the three connectedXYZ functions and was getting some (initially) odd results which I've resolved now - slight difference between what I expected, and how it actually works (just about to dig into the source now to confirm I get it) - but I figure for the benefit of others, I probably should draft up some words and propose an add to the current doc for the functions - was just wondering if an issue is the accepted approach? (and if here's the best place to discuss to ensure I'm not writing up misleading drivel..)

[Paul Molodowitch]

Sure, here is a fine place to discuss such things. And contributions are always welcome.  One question though - what are the "three connectedXYZ functions" you're referring to?

- Paul

On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Anthony Tan <antho...@greenworm.net> wrote:

Not sure if this is the best forum so redirect me if not but was just playing with the three connectedXYZ functions and was getting some (initially) odd results which I've resolved now - slight difference between what I expected, and how it actually works (just about to dig into the source now to confirm I get it) - but I figure for the benefit of others, I probably should draft up some words and propose an add to the current doc for the functions - was just wondering if an issue is the accepted approach? (and if here's the best place to discuss to ensure I'm not writing up misleading drivel..)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pymel-dev" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/pymel-dev/-/kJadyM2CJIcJ.
To post to this group, send email to pyme...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pymel-dev+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pymel-dev?hl=en.

[Anthony Tan]

sorry, more specifically - connectedEdges/Faces/Vertices() implemented for MeshEdge, MeshFace, and MeshVertex.

The situation came up just as I was just trying to work out how to determine what's logically connected to a MeshFace. The connectedEdges() and connectedFaces() calls worked roughly as I expected, but the connectedVertices() call on a face took me a little bit of headscratching. As best as I can tell, it's going to return all the vertices that can be reached in one edge-hop from any any vertex that the MeshFace is comprised of... since I'm low-level curious about most things I went back and did some general testing and came up with the following:

MeshVertex.connectedFaces() - all faces that include that vertex
MeshVertex.connectedEdges() - all edges that include that vertex
MeshVertex.connectedVertices() - all vertices that are connected to the vertex by one edge (i.e. the endpoints of all connected edges)

MeshFace.connectedFaces() - all faces that share an edge (i.e. all faces that share 2 or more vertices)
MeshFace.connectedEdges() - all edges that include a vertex of the face (i.e. all the edges radiating out from the face)
MeshFace.connectedVertices() - all verticies that are connected to the face by one edge (i.e. the endpoints of all connected edges)

MeshEdge.connectedFaces() - all faces that contain this edge (i.e. all faces that contain both vertices that make up the edge)
MeshEdge.connectedEdges() - all edges that include a vertex of the edge (i.e. all the edges radiating out from the two vertices that make up the edge)
MeshEdge.connectedVertices() - the two verticies that comprise the edge

I know it's not a lot of words, but if the above is right then I was going to bash it into better snippets of text and suggest updating the relevant function documentation since (at least, to me) what 'connected' meant was a bit nebulous.

Also, secondarily, does it strike anyone else that the MeshEdge.connectedVertices() call returns the result it does? Nothing else returns components that are members of the selected object..

-Anthony