From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-26 10:09:54
Arash Partow wrote:
> In your example:
> >> cout << distance(p1, p2) << endl;
> >> cout << distance(p2, p3) << endl;
> (not assuming the previous defs),
> In what space is this distance metric being computed (euclidean?
> what kind of precision are you after? should distance(p1, p2) ==
> distance(p2, p1),
> what about performance? I' want to write a gaming or graphics engine,
> how can I get around the checks and balances that say a round such as
> is_point_in_triangle will endure?
> Will I have to reinvent the wheel every time I can't get the exact
> thing I want out of the library?
That's besides the point. The point is that you should be able
to use different models of the point concept interchangeably
much like STL algorithms can work on different container types.
I think you are missing my point. I could very well rename
"distance" to "foo" and my point still holds.
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk