More default meshes

[ashandelle]

Currently only box and orthoplex are supported meshes, the colliders include capsule, cubinder, cylinder, duocylinder, and sphere.

Additional meshes

• Sphere (hypersphere/glome)
• Capsule
• Cubinder
• Cylinder (Spherinder)
• Duocylinder
• 600-Cell
• 120-Cell
• 24-Cell
• Plane mesh (flat cube)
• Spheritorus
• Torisphere
• Tiger torus

Godot appears to use only uv spheres but I don't think these will work well as the building blocks of higher dimensional shapes so I think the default should be cube spheres or in the case of the hypersphere a tesseract hypersphere.

If I can figure out how to I'll probably add some of these myself.

[aaronfranke]

We should consider which of these make more sense to use with Array*Mesh4D and which deserve dedicated types. For very simple shapes that are often needed at multiple sizes (ex: box), a dedicated type makes sense. For shapes that require customization (ex: more smoothness on curves in a sphere/capsule/etc), a dedicated type makes sense. For general shapes, loading data into an Array*Mesh4D makes more sense (ex: I think the *-Cell shapes fall under this).

I would start by adding the shapes we are more confident about. SphereTetraMesh4D and SphereWireMesh4D classes (I strongly prefer using names that are more friendly to 3D users when possible, so "glome" is too weird for me) would be good to add first. We need to find what algorithms there are for generating 4D spheres and UVW unwrapping them, a box-based one makes sense like how a 3D cube can be mapped to a 3D sphere.

[ashandelle]

I think aside from the -cells all the others I listed should definitely have dedicated types. The reason I included the -cells too was because I thought that making them would be very annoying and it would be nice to only have to do it once especially because unlike the dodecahedron and icosahedron they're going to be common example shapes in 4d projects.

As for the names I actually think attaching hyper to the front would be better since it distinguishes them without being unfriendly to 3d users or those who are more used to 4d (I actually got really confused for a bit when I saw cylinder in the collider list)

A box based unwrapping was what I was suggesting at the end but for more than just the hypersphere

[ashandelle]

Also I noticed that the code for the meshes has hard coded normals but I'm not sure that's necessary, is there a reason for them?

[aaronfranke]

The dimension is already clarified by the "4D" suffix, so I don't think "hyper" is necessary. Also, when "hyper" is isolated, it's ambiguous if that means 4D, or 5D/6D/7D/etc, or curved space like Hyperbolica.

The current meshes have a lot of things hard-coded (normals, UVW map, edge indices), but we can just calculate things for new meshes we add, especially if the data can be customized like making the curves smoother.

Also, I should mention, I have this class for creating ArrayWireMesh4Ds. In the event that something doesn't get a dedicated type, we could add it here instead. https://github.com/godot-dimensions/godot-4d/blob/master/mesh/wire/wire_mesh_builder_4d.h