Thomas, thanks for the information. I guess I should first have close look at your project before anything else. I will follow your advice and have a closer look at OpenCascade. I do know Hoops fairly well, I have written an OpenGL based Hoops alike toolkit at work. It implements about 50-60% of Hoops functionality. Hoops being non-free is not really my thing and for anything with even a commercial perspective it is out of the question. Again, thanks for your thorough advice. I appreciate it. Roland --- Thomas Schmidt <thomas.schmidt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > If you want something really usable and free, OpenCascade is the only > real > alternative (IMHO). > OC is _really_ big (14.000 header files/classes, usually one class > for each > file), but > the number core classes you need for daily use is _much_ lower. I'm > using OC > as > the kernel for TomCAD, and it works just fine. I do not use its > application > framework and > application interactive services, just the modelling data and > algorithms. > To get started, you could look at the pdf files provided with the > distribution. > > Bye, > Thomas > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Roland Krause" <rokrau@xxxxxxxxx> > To: <cad-linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 7:44 PM > Subject: [cad-linux] modeling kernel > > > > > > Anyone having some links to CSG and Brep datastructures, modeling > > kernels, etc.. > > Is there something comparable to ParaSolid, Asics in the free > world. > > > > Anybody interested in discussing this issue? > > > > I know OpenCascade is there but it seems a 800lb gorilla. > > > > Thanks, > > Roland > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day > > http://shopping.yahoo.com > > > > > > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day http://shopping.yahoo.com