Thu, 04 Jan 2018 19:40:52 +0200
add autosave
/* * LDForge: LDraw parts authoring CAD * Copyright (C) 2013 - 2015 Teemu Piippo * * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the * GNU General Public License for more details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. */ #include "ringFinder.h" #include "miscallenous.h" RingFinder g_RingFinder; RingFinder::RingFinder() {} // ============================================================================= // bool RingFinder::findRingsRecursor (double r0, double r1, Solution& currentSolution) { // Don't recurse too deep. if (m_stack >= 5 or r1 < r0) return false; // Find the scale and number of a ring between r1 and r0. double scale = r1 - r0; double num = r0 / scale; // If the ring number is integral, we have found a fitting ring to r0 -> r1! if (isInteger (num)) { Component cmp; cmp.scale = scale; cmp.num = (int) round (num); currentSolution.addComponent (cmp); // If we're still at the first recursion, this is the only // ring and there's nothing left to do. Guess we found the winner. if (m_stack == 0) { m_solutions.push_back (currentSolution); return true; } } else { // Try find solutions by splitting the ring in various positions. if (isZero (r1 - r0)) return false; double interval; // Determine interval. The smaller delta between radii, the more precise // interval should be used. We can't really use a 0.5 increment when // calculating rings to 10 -> 105... that would take ages to process! if (r1 - r0 < 0.5) interval = 0.1; else if (r1 - r0 < 10) interval = 0.5; else if (r1 - r0 < 50) interval = 1; else interval = 5; // Now go through possible splits and try find rings for both segments. for (double r = r0 + interval; r < r1; r += interval) { Solution sol = currentSolution; m_stack++; bool res = findRingsRecursor (r0, r, sol) and findRingsRecursor (r, r1, sol); m_stack--; if (res) { // We succeeded in finding radii for this segment. If the stack is 0, this // is the first recursion to this function. Thus there are no more ring segments // to process and we can add the solution. // // If not, when this function ends, it will be called again with more arguments. // Accept the solution to this segment by setting currentSolution to sol, and // return true to continue processing. if (m_stack == 0) m_solutions.push_back (sol); else { currentSolution = sol; return true; } } } return false; } return true; } // // This is the main algorithm of the ring finder. It tries to use math // to find the one ring between r0 and r1. If it fails (the ring number // is non-integral), it finds an intermediate radius (ceil of the ring // number times scale) and splits the radius at this point, calling this // function again to try find the rings between r0 - r and r - r1. // // This does not always yield into usable results. If at some point r == // r0 or r == r1, there is no hope of finding the rings, at least with // this algorithm, as it would fall into an infinite recursion. // bool RingFinder::findRings (double r0, double r1) { m_solutions.clear(); Solution sol; // If we're dealing with fractional radii, try upscale them into integral // ones. This should yield in more reliable and more optimized results. // For instance, using r0=1.5, r1=3.5 causes the algorithm to fail but // r0=3, r1=7 (scaled up by 2) yields a 2-component solution. We can then // downscale the radii back by dividing the scale fields of the solution // components. double scale = 1.0; if (not isZero (scale = r0 - floor (r0)) or not isZero (scale = r1 - floor (r1))) { double r0f = r0 / scale; double r1f = r1 / scale; if (isInteger (r0f) and isInteger (r1f)) { r0 = r0f; r1 = r1f; } // If the numbers are both at most one-decimal fractions, we can use a scale of 10 else if (isInteger (r0 * 10) and isInteger (r1 * 10)) { scale = 0.1; r0 *= 10; r1 *= 10; } } else { scale = 1.0; } // Recurse in and try find solutions. findRingsRecursor (r0, r1, sol); // If we had upscaled our radii, downscale back now. if (scale != 1.0) { for (Solution& sol : m_solutions) sol.scaleComponents (scale); } // Compare the solutions and find the best one. The solution class has an operator> // overload to compare two solutions. m_bestSolution = nullptr; for (Solution const& sol : m_solutions) { if (m_bestSolution == nullptr or sol.isSuperiorTo (m_bestSolution)) m_bestSolution = / } return (m_bestSolution); } // // Compares this solution with @other and determines which // one is superior. // // A solution is considered superior if solution has less // components than the other one. If both solution have an // equal amount components, the solution with a lesser maximum // ring number is found superior, as such solutions should // yield less new primitives and cleaner definitions. // // The solution which is found superior to every other solution // will be the one returned by RingFinder::bestSolution(). // bool RingFinder::Solution::isSuperiorTo (const Solution* other) const { // If one solution has less components than the other one, it is definitely // better. if (getComponents().size() != other->getComponents().size()) return getComponents().size() < other->getComponents().size(); // Calculate the maximum ring number. Since the solutions have equal // ring counts, the solutions with lesser maximum rings should result // in cleaner code and less new primitives, right? int maxA = 0, maxB = 0; for (int i = 0; i < getComponents().size(); ++i) { maxA = qMax (getComponents()[i].num, maxA); maxB = qMax (other->getComponents()[i].num, maxB); } if (maxA != maxB) return maxA < maxB; // Solutions have equal rings and equal maximum ring numbers. Let's // just say this one is better, at this point it does not matter which // one is chosen. return true; } void RingFinder::Solution::scaleComponents (double scale) { for (Component& cmp : m_components) cmp.scale *= scale; }