Added commands for object transforming (translate, rotate and scale)

[benjamaan476]

Added Commands to transform objects:

• SetObject(Position/Rotation/Scale) will set the specified local value to the passed in argument
• (Translate/Rotate/Scale)Object is a relative change based on the current local value. E.g. translate({5, 0, 0}) will move the object 5 units along the x-axis from say {11, 0, 0} to {16, 0, 0}. SetObjectPosition({5, 0, 0}) will set the position to {5, 0, 0}
• SetObjectParent will set the parent object of an object. The object (child) will inherit its parent's local values and its values will be applied on top of those values

[benjamaan476]

Don't merge - testing against the engine

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Please upload report for BASE (main@ad94891). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
modeling-cmds/src/def_enum.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
modeling-cmds/src/format/obj.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
modeling-cmds/src/format/ply.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
modeling-cmds/src/format/sldprt.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
modeling-cmds/src/format/step.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
modeling-cmds/src/format/stl.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #441   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   27.78%           
=======================================
  Files           ?       35           
  Lines           ?     1904           
  Branches        ?        0           
=======================================
  Hits            ?      529           
  Misses          ?     1375           
  Partials        ?        0           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	27.78% <0.00%> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[lf94]

The following is just a suggestion/idea. We can further reduce bandwidth by instead sending a list of transforms. Otherwise looks great!

Suggested change

	#[derive(Clone, Debug, Deserialize, JsonSchema, Serialize)]
	struct TransformBy<T> {
	/// The scale, or rotation, or translation.
	property: T,
	/// If true, overwrite the previous value with this.
	/// If false, the object will be scaled, or translated, or rotated, etc.
	set: bool,
	}
	///Set the transform of an object.
	#[derive(
	Clone, Debug, Deserialize, JsonSchema, Serialize, ModelingCmdVariantEmpty,
	)]
	pub struct SetObjectTransform
	{
	///Id of the object whose transform is to be set
	pub object_id: Uuid,
	#[serde(default)]
	translate: Option<TransformBy<Point3d>>,
	#[serde(default)]
	rotate: Option<TransformBy<Point3d>>,
	#[serde(default)]
	scale: Option<TransformBy<Point3d>>,
	}
	enum TransformOperation {
	Translate,
	Rotate,
	Scale
	}
	struct Transform<T> {
	operation: TransformOperation,
	value: T,
	set: bool,
	}
	///Set the transform of an object.
	#[derive(
	Clone, Debug, Deserialize, JsonSchema, Serialize, ModelingCmdVariantEmpty,
	)]
	pub struct SetObjectTransform
	{
	///Id of the object whose transform is to be set
	pub object_id: Uuid,
	transforms: Vec<Transform<Point3D>>
	}

[adamchalmers]

I thought about this, but this allows you to send multiple transforms that overwrite each other, e.g. [(Translate, <0,0,0>), (Translate, <1,1,1>)]. So I think the current approach is better -- it limits you to sending at most one transform for a given property and the given project.

[lf94]

It could be desirable from a programmer or mathematician point of view to compose transforms in various ways, ways I cannot imagine - for example [(Translate, <0,0,0>), (Translate, <1,1,1>)] could be desirable if they are composing (have set: false). Otherwise I agree with you.

[benjamaan476]

You are knocking on the door of a transform stack here. Which is where you specify a chain of transforms one after the other that get applied in that order. Typically comes along with the ability to push and pop transforms to a stack that lets you get pretty flexible

[adamchalmers]

We're now agreed that Transform endpoint should take a list of transforms.

[benjamaan476]

So these transforms will get applied one by one if more than one is provided? Is it up to the user to handle the complexity of the list? E.g. if two translates are side by side that could have just been one aggregate transform.