chore: added day1 update
This commit is contained in:
parent
9f0f74617d
commit
beee98de51
6
Week-1/Days-update/Day1.md
Normal file
6
Week-1/Days-update/Day1.md
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
|
||||
# Day 1 Update
|
||||
|
||||
- Set up the repository using Turborepo to organize the project as a monorepo.
|
||||
- Learned about the Scene Graph concept in Three.js.
|
||||
- Implemented the solar system from the Three.js manual scene graph tutorial: https://threejs.org/manual/#en/scenegraph
|
||||
- Started implementing the same solar system in React Three Fiber (R3F), but did not finish it yet.
|
||||
5
Week-1/Days-update/Day2.md
Normal file
5
Week-1/Days-update/Day2.md
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
|
||||
# Day 2 Update
|
||||
|
||||
- Continued work on Task 1 in React Three Fiber (R3F).
|
||||
- Implemented earth orbit motion by rotating a parent `group` with `useFrame`.
|
||||
- Current output: a very simple solar system where earth continuously orbits the sun.
|
||||
@ -1,60 +1,58 @@
|
||||
# Task: [Feature Name]
|
||||
# Task: Parent-Child Hierarchy
|
||||
|
||||
## Objective
|
||||
What is the feature trying to do?
|
||||
The objective was to create a simple 3D scene with two objects in a parent-child hierarchy, then verify that transformations applied to the parent (such as position and scale) are correctly inherited by the child.
|
||||
|
||||
## Vanilla three.js
|
||||
-Possible: Yes / Partial / No
|
||||
-Notes:
|
||||
-Key concepts:
|
||||
-Complexity: Easy / Medium / Hard
|
||||
-Possible: Yes
|
||||
-Notes: Implemented by creating sunMesh and attaching an earthOrbit group to it (`sunMesh.add(earthOrbit)`), then adding earthMesh to that group. Parent transforms propagate correctly to child.
|
||||
-Key concepts: Scene graph hierarchy, `THREE.Group` as orbit pivot, local vs world transforms, animation loop for orbit/spin.
|
||||
-Complexity: Easy
|
||||
|
||||
## R3F
|
||||
-Possible: Yes / Partial / No
|
||||
-Notes:
|
||||
-What R3F abstracted:
|
||||
-Complexity: Easy / Medium / Hard
|
||||
-Possible: Yes
|
||||
-Notes: Implemented by nesting Earth inside a `<group ref={orbitRef}>` inside the Sun `<mesh>`, making Earth a child in the same scene graph hierarchy.
|
||||
-What R3F abstracted: Declarative JSX scene creation, automatic render lifecycle integration with React, and frame updates via `useFrame` instead of manual renderer/loop setup.
|
||||
-Complexity: Easy
|
||||
|
||||
## Thob Page Builder
|
||||
-Possible: Yes / Partial / No
|
||||
-Notes:
|
||||
-Builder steps:
|
||||
-Complexity: Easy / Medium / Hard
|
||||
-Possible: Yes
|
||||
-Notes: Implemented by putting the Earth mesh inside the Sun mesh (parent-child). Changing Sun position/scale also affects Earth as expected (Earth follows position and scale inheritance). However, when Earth position is changed directly, Earth shape appears to distort/stretch as it moves farther from Sun.
|
||||
-Builder steps: Create Sun mesh -> add Earth mesh as child of Sun -> test parent transform inheritance by changing Sun position/scale -> test child local transform by changing Earth position.
|
||||
-Complexity: Easy
|
||||
|
||||
## Comparison Summary
|
||||
-Possible in all 3? Yes / Partial / No
|
||||
-Main differences:
|
||||
-Where Thob is better:
|
||||
-Where Thob is weaker:
|
||||
-What feels awkward or unclear:
|
||||
-Possible in all 3? Yes
|
||||
-Main differences: Vanilla gives explicit low-level control; R3F gives cleaner declarative hierarchy; Thob gives fastest visual setup but less predictable child transform behavior in this case. Animation was not possible in Thob but was possible in vanilla and r3f.
|
||||
-Where Thob is better: Quick setup and visual parenting without writing code.
|
||||
-Where Thob is weaker: Child transform behavior is less transparent when editing child position under a transformed parent.
|
||||
-What feels awkward or unclear: Local vs inherited transforms are not obvious in the editor, and distortion behavior on child position change is unexpected.
|
||||
|
||||
## Limitation Type (if any)
|
||||
-[ ] Editor UX limitation
|
||||
-[x] Editor UX limitation
|
||||
-[ ] Runtime limitation
|
||||
-[ ] Schema / data model limitation
|
||||
-[ ] Component limitation
|
||||
-[x] Component limitation
|
||||
-[ ] Event system limitation
|
||||
-[ ] Asset pipeline limitation
|
||||
-[ ] Unknown / needs investigation
|
||||
|
||||
## Workaround
|
||||
-Is there a workaround?
|
||||
-If yes, what is it?
|
||||
-Is there a workaround? NO
|
||||
-No, I tried a lot of different things, like many groupa and flex inside the parent mesh and different ways to place the components.
|
||||
|
||||
## Suggested Improvement
|
||||
-What should improve in Thob?
|
||||
-What should improve in Thob? Make transform inheritance behavior explicit and stable for nested meshes, especially when parent scale is applied and child position is edited.
|
||||
-Is it:
|
||||
-editor
|
||||
-runtime
|
||||
-component
|
||||
-UX
|
||||
-schema/data
|
||||
|
||||
## Difficulty Estimate
|
||||
-Easy / Medium / Hard
|
||||
-Easy
|
||||
|
||||
## Business Value
|
||||
-Low / Medium / High
|
||||
-High
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommendation
|
||||
Should Thob support this better? Why?
|
||||
Should Thob support this better? Why? Yes. Parent-child transform consistency is a core 3D workflow; reliable nested transforms reduce confusion, improve trust in the builder, and make more advanced scenes practical without code-level debugging.
|
||||
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user