Bán Dénes

Good point, forgot to run those. What's worse, it revealed that I also forgot about division by zero (my arch nemesis) yet again! All fixed now, tho, and I even...

Sadly ran into another issue, which is not connected to (nor solved by) my previous fix, but it's a "weird combination result" regardless... Code to reproduce on the demo site:...

Phew, found this as well. Turns out the automatically generated `farPoint` was a really poor choice, as it accidentally lead to the exact angle where the `lineToFarPoint` was tangential to...

Sounds really promising! I assume my previous PR won't be needed, then. To be honest, tho, the layout generator I'm writing is itself a side-quest, and the makerjs debug it...

Hey @danmarshall , any news on this front? Just noticed that my generator utility still has to depend on my "pirated" fork of makerjs and thought I'd ask if the...

Ah, gotcha. No rush on the big stuff, I get how time-consuming such a refactor can be. Just wondering whether a bugfix release to npm would be possible in the...

I'm not sure what you mean... I introduced the `factor` [here](https://github.com/mrzealot/maker.js/commit/c41ac58590765f033139f8e18464976521de7c08) explicitly because of scaling issues (see first comment). The [subsequent commit](https://github.com/mrzealot/maker.js/commit/7461df77082d722cd181d517a5e7b6c22800b7f6) just makes it more robust and adds tests....

Well, we could just multiply the precision by the `factor` as opposed to the difference on the left side, if that's what you mean. Or calculate a separate `precision` value....

Sure, that would be an elegant addition (which I've also thought about). But I think that would only be relevant *in addition to* this dynamic scaling, not instead of. There's...

@danmarshall Thanks! And yes, the `farPoint` stuff turned out to be completely unrelated, and can be circumvented by using a random value within the combination options. As for the slopes,...