Hi QRUXEL,
The honest truth is that PixelCNC's heightmap based setup is just not ideal for large projects, because it entails processing huge heightmaps for anything that needs high resolution.
The canvas resolution is going to be the absolute resolution that canvas compositing and any kind of shape generation happens at. It is also the resolution that cutpaths are generated from the canvas at. That's not to say that cutpath coordinates are limited to that resolution, but instead that the shape/dimension of things contoured will be limited to that resolution.
The model supersampling factor is how many effective pixels that a 3D model is rendered at, relative to the canvas resolution, when PixelCNC is internally generating a heightmap from a model-layer. So if your canvas resolution is 200ppi and your model supersampling is set to 9x, then model-layers will be rendered at 600ppi (i.e. 3x3 model rasterization pixels per canvas pixel). The model supersampling is there for antialiasing purposes, so that model geometry doesn't result in jagged aliased edges when compositing with the canvas (for toolpathing or any other contouring-related functions). If accuracy and dimension of features is important then I would crank up the model super sampling as high as it will go.
So PixelCNC is currently 100k lines of code, not counting whitespace lines or comments. It was originally much simpler and my ideas for a v2.0 that was meant to be written from scratch ended up just getting somewhat shoehorned into the original v1.0 codebase. It's a lot of bespoke code that there is not going to be anything any LLM would've gleaned from the web about, as opposed to a project that more so just glues a bunch of libraries together through their various APIs. I don't have the time to sit down and start trying to hold an LLM's hand trying to see if it will ever understand PixelCNC's code base enough to be able to do anything worthwhile with it. For boilerplate I'm hearing the LLMs are great, but I am highly doubtful that they'll be able to do much with a 100k line codebase written in C that facilitates extricating all of the issues that are basically a part of its DNA, only because those decisions were made very early on at the outset.
I appreciate the suggestion but at the end of the day PixelCNC just needs a complete and total re-write from scratch that actually accounts for things like localization, keyboard layouts, etc. It is the way that it is for the foreseeable future, unless someone wants to come along and start paying me a livable income to develop it into a more solid product. Nowadays I am earning most of my income from making custom signs for clients and just don't spend much time at all sitting at the computer like I could back in the heyday of PixelCNC's development. I'd love to get back into coding again but it just doesn't pay the bills. :P
Thanks again, and let me know if you have any other questions or need help with anything. Have a good rest of your weekend! :]
- Charlie