Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add parameterization type to orientation constraints #96
Add parameterization type to orientation constraints #96
Changes from 3 commits
fe38f75
c829a75
552e253
cfffda5
004d788
180b316
490e752
1f4f230
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm good with the content, but shouldn't this new block be moved above the
absolute_axis_tolerance
entries? This line also assumes they are below.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, good catch, I thought I changed it to above... I will fix it. But about the order:
My reasoning was that if you do not care about the parameterization you don't have to read it. I imagined the file was organized with the important (required) features at the top and the optional less common features at the bottom.
But on the other hand, it is maybe better to first mention how the tolerance values are used before allowing you to specify them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@felixvd I changed "below" to "above". I assume users start reading at the top of the file, and they can stop reading if they don't care about which parameterization is used. (For small tolerances, or tolerance on a single axis, this does not matter.)
Is this ok?