| 03:02.58 | *** join/#stepcode infobot (ibot@rikers.org) |
| 03:02.58 | *** topic/#stepcode is STEPcode - data exchange with the technologies of ISO10303 || http://stepcode.org || LOG http://ibot.rikers.org/%23stepcode/ |
| 05:44.32 | *** join/#stepcode saurabh (uid218264@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-gbgcwafwjsmcdkhu) |
| 10:29.21 | *** join/#stepcode Yuriy__ (5f1993eb@gateway/web/freenode/ip.95.25.147.235) |
| 19:57.17 | *** join/#stepcode Yuriy_ (5f1993eb@gateway/web/freenode/ip.95.25.147.235) |
| 20:14.03 | *** join/#stepcode Yuriy__ (~yuriy@95-25-147-235.broadband.corbina.ru) |
| 20:43.58 | *** join/#stepcode Yuriy_ (~yuriy@95-25-147-235.broadband.corbina.ru) |
| 20:48.53 | Yuriy_ | Hi! Iâm interested in GSoC project, STEP Multiple Protocol Parsing. Writing something like compiler seems very interesting to me. I have decent C/C++ experience, good knowledge of git and cmake, but I donât know STEP protocols at all, although I think I can learn them before GSoC will begin. Is it ok? |
| 22:07.03 | starseeker | Yuriy_: hi! That project is more of a BRL-CAD project than a stepcode project, although stepcode would certainly be involved |
| 22:08.09 | starseeker | it's actually a file converter rather than a compiler - the relevant code can be found here: https://sourceforge.net/p/brlcad/code/HEAD/tree/brlcad/trunk/src/conv/step/ |
| 22:11.55 | starseeker | Yuriy_: there is some background info on STEP here: http://brlcad.org/~starseeker/STEP.html |
| 22:12.23 | starseeker | in particular, the SCHEMAS AND IMPLEMENTATION RESOURCES section will be of interest |
| 22:20.10 | Yuriy_ | starseeker: thanks! |
| 22:33.38 | Yuriy_ | So, BRL-CAD has its own format and the goal is to write converter from STEP AP203, AP214 to it? |
| 22:38.53 | starseeker | correct |
| 22:39.13 | starseeker | we have a basic AP203 importer, but don't yet support AP203e2, AP214 or AP242 |
| 22:42.04 | starseeker | we have (IIRC) most of AP203 working at at least a basic level - there is one form of hierarchy/combination we don't support |
| 22:43.13 | starseeker | I think one of those guides talks about the two different ways AP203 can encode hierarchy - if you want to work on a patch to go with a proposal, a good (if perhaps ambitious) patch would be to identify the missing form of hierarchy and see if you can write a patch to add support for it to step-g |
| 22:43.59 | starseeker | AP203 is almost (but not exactly) a subset of the other standards, which usually means to support them we have to support what's in AP203 anyhow |
| 22:44.05 | starseeker | so that was our logical staring point |
| 22:44.24 | starseeker | unfortunately, AP203 doesn't have some nifty things (like color) that subsequent standards have |
| 22:45.47 | starseeker | fair warning - what I've suggested as a patch is ambitious |
| 22:46.15 | starseeker | but success with it would also show excellent ability to understand the code and standard(s) at play |
| 22:47.00 | starseeker | the first order of business should be to understand how the current step-g code is organized and works |
| 22:48.33 | starseeker | since we already support one of the hierarchy types, that's the starting point for understanding how to go at the other one |
| 22:49.37 | Yuriy_ | Nice. Where can I read about step-g and from what document it's better to start with STEP protocols? |
| 22:52.43 | starseeker | https://github.com/erossignon/node-STEP/blob/master/specs/recprac203v8.pdf |
| 22:56.30 | starseeker | that's the best starting point I know of for the step protocols |
| 22:56.47 | starseeker | as for the code, see the sourceforge link above |
| 22:57.34 | starseeker | unfortunately, in the latter case, the code pretty much is the documentation |