Re: SolidWorks for Architectural Work?

Cliff wrote:
> On Sun, 11 May 2008 12:48:48 -0700, "John R. Carroll"
> <jcarroll@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> Cliff wrote:
>>> On Sat, 10 May 2008 11:25:19 -0700 (PDT), zxys <paul@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The negative.. for large 1:1 layouts,.. parasolid has a 1km limit.
>>>
>>>   Metric software?
>>
>> Parasolid has always imposed a limit to the size of the model space
>> Cliff. It's gotten larger over the years but is still there.
>
>   Precision (limits) should be in database units but I'd think but
> they probably chose metric (default for limiting factor units) as 1
> mm is smaller than 1".
>   Then they can convert back & forth but never exceed their chosen
> limits in either system.
>   I'd also think that the real limit is a power of 2 (and is
> based/related to floating point word size, IOW 32 bits).
>   As numbers in computers get larger (or smaller than 1)
> the distance between any two numbers that can be represented
> grows larger so more error can creep into calculations & results.
>   There are largest and smallest possible floating point numbers
> (absolute value other than zero) as well as integers. The next
> smallest number for floats is quite some "distance" from the
> largest.
>   All depends on word size (bits) & where they are using the
> decimal point. But these days we mostly use IEEE 32 bit math
> (as default) ..

It's something like that but in the end, a cap was imposed for memory
management and allocation issues.
This also shows up when you im****t tessellated data into anything built on
ParaSolid.
Even the PC based version of UG was a real memory leaker in 1999.
UG for Unix, OTOH, was another story completely.

-- 

           John R. Carroll
  www.machiningsolution.com