You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently it's up to the user to make sure that shapes added to a ShapesLayer are not overlapping. If they are, the permittivity of both those shapes is added in that region, which is probably not expected behavior.
It might be useful to set the permittivity to the one of the last shape, but it's not clear how exactly since the shapes are defined directly through their Fourier components (no real-space grid). Or at least we could raise a warning if something like this is happening.
Also this could be important for optimizations. If overlap can't be handled properly (see above), it could be useful to somehow implement constraints that allow you to enforce that the shapes are not crossing as the optimization progresses.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently it's up to the user to make sure that shapes added to a
ShapesLayer
are not overlapping. If they are, the permittivity of both those shapes is added in that region, which is probably not expected behavior.It might be useful to set the permittivity to the one of the last shape, but it's not clear how exactly since the shapes are defined directly through their Fourier components (no real-space grid). Or at least we could raise a warning if something like this is happening.
Also this could be important for optimizations. If overlap can't be handled properly (see above), it could be useful to somehow implement constraints that allow you to enforce that the shapes are not crossing as the optimization progresses.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: