00:23 <JordanBrown> We should check to see whether MediaWiki/Wikibooks has expandable ToC entries. Terse is good, but I'm not sure we'll be able to come up with a dozen sections, with the boundaries between them clear.

00:23 <JordanBrown> With respect to particular sections...

00:24 <JordanBrown> So far, what you've called "Word in progress" has been inline in the document, marked with a "Requires development snapshot" marker. It's the same marker that shows what version features arrived in.

00:25 <JordanBrown> I would push "Build Manual" entirely to another page, leaving behind only a single line here.

00:26 <JordanBrown> "Command Glossary" is not new, but seems like a bad idea. It duplicates the cheat sheet.

07:47 <bitbasher> WRT Jordan's comment https://github.com/openscad/openscad/issues/6001#issuecomment-3094834879

07:47 <bitbasher> > I think it's also a mechanism for testing and diagnosing OpenSCAD ... If you are confused by what the previewer is showing you, looking at it in CSG will let you see it without loops, variables, et cetera, just raw geometry. For OpenSCAD itself, for instance, it helps to verify that argument processing has yielded the right results. then maybe it would be a good idea to add a diagnosis panel that would always show the .csg version

07:48 <bitbasher> oh .. that pasted in messy -- so my suggestion, and question, is

07:48 <bitbasher> then maybe it would be a good idea to add a diagnosis panel that would always show the .csg version of the currently active compiled script. and then maybe another to show the raw mesh data formatted for human readability

07:49 <bitbasher> if others agree i will open an enhancement

08:12 <teepee> if the content is just "show CSG" I don't agree

08:12 <teepee> 1) a very simple version already exists

08:13 <teepee> 2) it maybe be helpful for smaller projects and people who know the internals

08:13 <teepee> 3) I'm not sure it provides much help to the casual user

08:14 <teepee> fwiw, I never even considert using it that way (but that's maybe not an argument for judging it

13:43 <bitbasher> does this FAQ still stand up now that we have Manifold for rendering ? https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/OpenSCAD_User_Manual/FAQ#How_can_I_export_screenshots_with_higher_resolution_than_the_current_window

13:44 <bitbasher> should i say that this tip is obsolete if you have a nwe installation and have enabled Manifold?

13:51 <bitbasher> is this really a FAQ? the title is a question but the text does not really address it .. it reads like a dicussion of some issues .. i propose to just delete it as it reads like a discussion of almost theoretical issues https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/OpenSCAD_User_Manual/FAQ#Why_am_I_getting_an_error_when_writing_a_=_a_+_1?

15:54 <teepee> first one: I don't see how that has anything to do with Manifold

15:55 <teepee> second: yes, that is very much FAQ

21:43 <gbruno> [github] LoliDeveloper opened issue #6038 (cmake raising errors at compiling on Debian 12) https://github.com/openscad/openscad/issues/6038

22:32 <InPhase> bitbasher: Yes, it's definitely a FAQ. That's not a good FAQ answer though.

22:35 <InPhase> Looks like teepee grabbed a forum answer for that question, but it could do with a total user-focused rewrite I think.

22:36 <InPhase> I think almost everyone asking that question is in a very different starting place than the person who generated that answer assumed.

22:37 <InPhase> It should start with something like, "You are attempting to use an imperative programming technique, but OpenSCAD features a different kind of language called a declarative functional language."

22:38 <InPhase> And then it should address this difference and what it means. Then after explaining this, it should provide solution options for the user to do what they are actually trying to do.

22:39 <InPhase> It is after all not the case that we just forgot to add support for this. :)

22:40 <InPhase> This was a design decision, with interwoven consequences.

23:02 <bitbasher> ok .. i hear you on both points .. but i will update the FAQ text when i am next concious

23:44 <JordanBrown> Except that it would probably be more work than it would be worth, it would be fun to build an OpenSCAD that parallelized module execution and expression evaluation.

23:46 <JordanBrown> But I'm not actually sure that that helps to answer the question; OpenSCAD assignments definitely have order.

23:47 <JordanBrown> Before you say "because it's a declarative functional language", you need to have queued up an answer to the obvious follow-on question: "Well, why did you do it that way, since it makes a lot of stuff harder to write?".

23:53 <JordanBrown> And "... when basically no other mainstream languages do it?"