merge with STEPToMesh (and STEPToPoints?)

[jmairboeck]

For easier deployment (especially when linking statically) and to reduce code duplication and maintenance efforts between the STEP processing tools, it could make sense to merge them into a single project, producing a single binary which can be invoked in several modes, e.g. similar to how the command line clients of git or svn work.

Listing the contents of a STEP file (i.e. -c) could then be a dedicated mode because it is shared between all other processing modes.

The code for reading a STEP file, for parts selection and maybe specifying the working unit (see aleutgeb/STEPToMesh#4) could be shared.

[aleutgeb]

Hello,
we are following the design philosophy "Do one thing, and do it well" or "Single-responsibility principle". So currently there are no plans to merge the functionality.

[jmairboeck]

We will keep the statically linked separate tools for now. Size-wise, two statically linked tools are still (slightly) smaller or nearly equal than using dynamic linking. My dynamically linked builds are about double in size than the static versions for both STEPToMesh and STEPToXSection. If we ever need a third one (e.g. STEPToPoints), we should probably switch to dynamic linking.