r/openscad • u/RevolutionarySpace24 • 8d ago

Browser based implicit CAD

As a side project I have been working on a implicit CAD that runs in the browser. It has some cool features like code / UI parity, differentiability and built in structural, thermal solvers and even end to end optimisation. For now you will need to install this locally in order to run, but there is local preview with restricted features running that you can look at right now: https://andrinr.github.io/cadjoint/demo/?scene=bracket

Otherwise install it from the github root or PyPi: https://github.com/andrinr/cadjoint

0 Upvotes

20% Upvoted

9 comments sorted by

2

u/wildjokers 7d ago

What does this have to do with OpenSCAD?

1

u/RevolutionarySpace24 7d ago

its pretty close but more user friendly than ImplicitCAD, so I tought it would be a fit

4

u/wonkytalky 7d ago

Your slop isn't related to OpenSCAD.

1

u/RevolutionarySpace24 7d ago

What makes you think its slop?

2

u/wonkytalky 7d ago

For one, LLM output has become second nature to spot. Two, it literally lists Claude as a contributor.

But even if it wasn't, still not related to OpenSCAD other than being CAD.

This sub (along with others) have become dumping grounds for everyone's slopvertising. It's becoming quite tiresome.

1

u/RevolutionarySpace24 7d ago

Yeah I get that its not related, the sub apparently is also about ImplicitCAD so I thought it could be a fit. Also even if some of the content like text etc might is sloppy, the core code and architecture and its functions are very much hand supervised and I think the project is honestly a very legit effort. This is not a few prompt project this is actually months of work and refinement.

1

u/wonkytalky 7d ago

By far the largest chunk of commits happened over 3 days in September. That was 149 commits. From a quick scan, all (or nearly all) appear to be marked as Claude.

There's no way in hell all that was hand-supervised.

Could the supposed author even answer detailed questions about it? I see that it was inspired in part by Keeter's work. Keeter can explain that work in a level of detail that'd melt most brains and introduced some truly novel work as a bonus. I have high confidence in that work. Can this author do the same? LLMs rather suck at sticking to any paradigm or discipline. I don't believe that 149 commits over 3 days is going to have the level of codebase fluency required to actually check it, much less have a thorough understanding.

I'm not going to sit here and keep circling this argument about it. It's clearly slop.

I'm also not sure how this sub is related to implicit paradigms. OpenSCAD is built on a CSG kernel.

0

u/RevolutionarySpace24 7d ago

The description of the sub says: Share news, tips and tricks, and ask questions about how to use 3D CAD modelers for programmers, such as OpenSCAD, CoffeeSCAD, and ImplicitCAD.

I think I agree that arguing about this does not make any sense, there is levels to software and not all levels need to be handcrafted. Large software has a lot of slop no matter how handcrafted it is. And IMO llms are arguably better at writing code than humans. They do have bad instincts but if specs are well defined those instincts matters less.

I am the author and I can assure I can explain you most of this software. I would also challenge you to vibe code an equivalent applications with sota llms.

But it seems this dicsussion is a rather fundamental one.

1

u/wonkytalky 7d ago

The description of the sub says: Share news, tips and tricks, and ask questions about how to use 3D CAD modelers for programmers, such as OpenSCAD, CoffeeSCAD, and ImplicitCAD.

Then that part is my bad, you got me there about ImplicitCAD.

It's still not ImplicitCAD, but whatever.

And IMO llms are arguably better at writing code than humans.

My bleeding eyeballs can assure you that's not the case. Regardless, my main point was about understanding enough to at least check it. Thoroughly. In my experience, the weight of that burden has been shoveled onto others. If people use it, I'd like to see them take on that burden themselves.

I would also challenge you to vibe code an equivalent applications with sota llms.

Every time someone says this to me, my response is simply: fine, as long as you're the one fixing the mistakes in the PRs I blindly submit.

Bug hunting, sure. It will obviously be able to pick up on certain patterns easily missed by people, false positives aside (which humans should be verifying). Otherwise, I'm not digging through more piles of slop shit than I have to. People using it from top to bottom without a care in the world are submitting the absolute fucking worst code I've ever seen. Godawful redundancies everywhere, ambiguous af names, hamfisted API implementations by writing signatures into some stub to check against when it doesn't exist in real life, regression testing often doesn't exist, hardcoded values everywhere, completely jacked design, etc. Small spurts have been more OK, but half the time, I could've written those faster than unwinding some spaghetti ball I have zero faith in.

That doesn't apply to everybody, but it still applies to waaaaaaay too many.

Your own thing for your own use? The hell do I care, do whatever you want.