Pythonocc-nodes-for-Ryven VS pythonocc-core

As a visual person (traditionally trained as a graphic artist), I've wanted this sort of thing for a long while, and I've been trying to use it for 3D.

Surprisingly, there are multiple specialized tools for this:

- https://www.blockscad3d.com --- an adaptation of Google's Blockly to OpenSCAD

- https://github.com/derkork/openscad-graph-editor --- wires and nodes, it has the advantage of exposing _all_ of OpenSCAD's commands (the above has a subset)

- https://github.com/Tanneguydv/Pythonocc-nodes-for-Ryven --- a module for using PythonOCC in Ryven --- when I finally succeeded, I found the language inscrutable, even when provided w/ quite nice examples (definitely a failing on my part, not that of the tool)

- https://github.com/graphscad/graphscad --- it took a long while for the source code for this to be made available, and for a while it had compatibility problems (why was "cube" redefined?) --- probably defunct for political reasons, it had some interesting ideas, in particular the ability to have custom icons for modules

- https://www.nodebox.net --- if memory serves I got hung up by not easily being able to do 3D, and when doing 2D having precision problems (or maybe that was Processing.org)

and I've been using these tools to make various things:

https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d/3d-project

(and maybe eventually I'll finish something)

The problem I've been running into is there doesn't seem to be an answer to the question:

"What does an algorithm look like?"

I recently had occasion to mention Herman Hesse's _The Glass Bead Game_ (also published as _Magister Ludi_) and I'll bring it up again --- what is a meaningful graphical representation of a program?

The Drakon folks argued that there should be one true path but that's not really communicative and I would note that if this was a simple thing it wouldn't be decades since I last saw a physical Flowcharting Template:

https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object-groups/flo...

(and it's pretty rare to even see a well-done electronic drawing of a flowchart since Visio made its splash and vanished into the bowels of Microsoft)

The main problem seems to be one of expressiveness not scaling up well, hence:

https://blueprintsfromhell.tumblr.com/

https://scriptsofanotherdimension.tumblr.com/

Presumably, one doesn't want to define modules/variables unnecessarily --- but the question becomes where is that boundary?

If you define too many, then you're back to the "wall of text" which one was trying to avoid (but wrapped up in nice boxes with some lines or shapes), and if one doesn't use them (well, look at the pretty/awful images in the links above).

Ideally, a well-coded visual program would have a pleasing aesthetic appearance which is expressive and communicates flow and function, and I've tried for that at:

https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d/programming

(though I wish that there was an easy way to export an SVG version of a program)

I believe that what is needed here is some graphical equivalent to Literate Programming: http://literateprogramming.com

Is there a nice GUI toolkit integration which would allow making a graphical application with this? I have an idea I want to try it which might be a good fit.

"What does an algorithm look like?"

I'm an intensely visual person, but have never found a visual programming system which scales well --- the problem is, past a certain level of complexity one has to use modules, which then devolves the visual representation down to just a bunch named blocks.

That said, I'm using BlockSCAD:

https://www.blockscad3d.com/community/projects/1421975

to work up designs which I'm then putting into other tools.

Looking at GraphSCAD:

http://graphscad.blogspot.com

and there's also Ryven and pythonocc which I managed to get installed:

https://ryven.org

https://github.com/Tanneguydv/Pythonocc-nodes-for-Ryven

but I'd really like to see a tool for this sort of thing which made G-code.

It seems a bizarre statement to state that OpenCASCADE isn't fully capable. Its the only OS licensed kernel that'll read a STEP file. Also "modern foundation" is a misleading statement, any CAD kernel bearing any kind of relevance seems implying a codebase that's been around for a quarter century. Like it or not OpenCASCADE is the hand that was dealt. I've worked with the technology [1] extensively and it provided the underpinnings for a startup I've founded [2]. pythonocc is the bees knees, it allows you to develop a proper CAD app. Don't take my word for it, but see also the many publications that have built on the tech [3]

[1] https://github.com/tpaviot/pythonocc-core