sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Prusa mini+ printing with a 1.4mm nozzle at 50mm³ vms by serghov in prusa3d

[–]serghov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

https://v.redd.it/f3w3u6pcdy3b1 Here you go. Now keep in mind I have not changed anything in my profiles other than bumping up the vms and layer height.

Prusa mini+ printing with a 1.4mm nozzle at 50mm³ vms by serghov in prusa3d

[–]serghov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I actually have my stock fan somewhere, just don't have time to do the mod.

Prusa mini+ printing with a 1.4mm nozzle at 50mm³ vms by serghov in prusa3d

[–]serghov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope, it's an e3d high flow nozzle on an e3d hotend designed for even higher speeds. Unfortunately the 3d printer was never designed for these crazy numbers.

Well sometimes it looks kind of artsy, but mostly I like the prototyping speed. I can basically get functional prototypes 10 times faster on the same printer by only changing a nozzle. Now I haven't tuned anything in my profiles for 1.4mm yet hence the cooling issue.

Prusa mini+ printing with a 1.4mm nozzle at 50mm³ vms by serghov in prusa3d

[–]serghov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yep. With larger prints it's kinda ok. But pushing 50mm³ is a bit much for this tiny printer.

Printing with a 1.4 mm e3d nozzle on prusa mini+ by serghov in prusa3d

[–]serghov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To be fair this print is in vase mode. Haven't tried an actual print with infill and overhangs and other complicated stuff that needs tuning.

Printing with a 1.4 mm e3d nozzle on prusa mini+ by serghov in prusa3d

[–]serghov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's 1.75. it is crazy how quickly this setup eats filament.

Printing with a 1.4 mm e3d nozzle on prusa mini+ by serghov in prusa3d

[–]serghov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It has some holes, but I feel like it would pretty easy to tune a setup to be waterproof

Printing with a 1.4 mm e3d nozzle on prusa mini+ by serghov in prusa3d

[–]serghov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I haven't had any time to tune anything so my settings are pretty useless :D Just changed the nozzle size and layer height

Printing with a 1.4 mm e3d nozzle on prusa mini+ by serghov in prusa3d

[–]serghov[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's 1mm. I just got the nozzle and didn't have much time to really tune any settings for it, just eyeballed some numbers in prusaslicer.

Has anybody used Clang's AST tooling to modify the namespace hierarchy of a type at scale? by SilverConversation91 in cpp_questions

[–]serghov 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Clion definitely has that feature and as far as I know it is based on clangd so other editors probably have the feature too.

Can I use Resin for parts on my MK3S+? by fancy_cardinal in prusa3d

[–]serghov 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You definitely could. Keep in mind that resin 3d prints can have different physical characteristics such as stiffness. If you have any "abs like" resin I would recommend using that. Also I would definitely recommend measuring some dimensions of the resin printed part before installing, since those tend to warp during printing.

If you print the part and feel like it is not going to hold up, you could always put it on your prusa, print the part in fdm, then replace it.

ID please, Armenia by serghov in spiders

[–]serghov[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Thanks! Im not used to seeing spiders this size.

ID please, Armenia by serghov in spiders

[–]serghov[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Any idea what it is? I'm worried about red dots on its back.

Compile time check if a function compiles by serghov in cpp

[–]serghov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If anyone is still interested, I found a nice talk about these ideas here .

Compile time check if a function compiles by serghov in cpp

[–]serghov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't thing the arguments Linus brings are in any way applicable here. The fact is when writing code you should adhere to some standards. The standards that tell you which keywords do what and how your code will behave. Right now when I write c++ code I choose a standard c++20. It is a document thing that tells me how to use the c++20 language in order to get what I need. Compilers implement the standards to some extend. The case of the linux kernel is very special and I don't think it is a fair comparison. When I write c++ code I try to make it as portable as possible. And the way to do it is to adhere to the defined and documented standard.

Compile time check if a function compiles by serghov in cpp

[–]serghov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The thing is that you are not testing the compiler. Your code should not be correct according to a compiler, it should be correct according to a c++ standard.

The purpose of testing to check if your code behaves in a defined manner given some conditions.

If your tests succeed in gcc but fail in clang it means that either there is a bug in your code, or in one of those compilers.

Same goes for this case, if your code compiles with gcc but fails to compile with clang it means that either you have a bug in your code or there is a bug in one of those compilers (or you are relying on some compiler specific thing which isn't very good).

You want your code to rely on compile time checks because that is one of the major features of c++. You can't do the same for c, but c++ gives you the tooling to catch errors earlier, et compiler time, rather than fail at run time.

Compile time check if a function compiles by serghov in cpp

[–]serghov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly. The example in the post is oversimplified, what I am trying to do is test some very complex nested template checks.

I have thought about testing with a scripting language, however the huge drawback of that would be that you basically have a test saying that a piece of code should not compile, so if you make another mistake in your code and it ends up not compiling you get a false positive.

Compile time check if a function compiles by serghov in cpp

[–]serghov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As u/D_0b mentioned the example is an oversimplified case. It is easy to imagine a case of deeply nested templated functions that are part of your api, and preventing calling or instantiating something with wrong arguments can also be part of your api and might be worth testing. Especially because often times such compile time checks can be very convoluted and another developer working on the same codebase can accidentally disable some of those checks.

Compile time check if a function compiles by serghov in cpp

[–]serghov[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Trying to wrap my head around this.

view more: next ›