
Boost : 
Subject: Re: [boost] Geometry and spatial indexes, my opinion
From: Matthias Schabel (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 20081009 16:53:26
>> be a teomporary at the interface because as I've just discussed with
>> Brandon, there is the clear need to make things like polar points
>> conform to Cartesian interfaces, which is incompatible with direct
>> access to the data members. Since we already have to make a
>> temporary
>> we should cast at that point instead of having yet another temoporary
>> and cast later on.
>>
>
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but it seems to me that an
> algorithm that works
> with Cartesian coordinates will tend to be very inefficient if it
> has to convert
> to and from polar coordinates on the fly at every access.
Just to further this point : if we want to do geometry in spherical
coordinates, then the
point type cannot be homogeneous, especially if we wanted, e.g., to
enforce dimensional
correctness a la Boost.Units :
cartesianPoint<si::length,si::length,si::length>
vs.
sphericalPoint<si::length,si::radians,si::radians>
I understand that for most of the applications that people are
considering, cartesian
coordinates are dominant, but I can easily imagine a really cool game
that accurately
modeled relativistic effects to simulate space combat at nearlight
speed; to do that,
you need a much more sophisticated and flexible system that is capable
of dealing
with Minkowski metrics rather than Euclidean... You could also have a
game where players
were constrained to motion on the surface of a 3sphere...seems like
there are a bunch
of possibilities that thinking in a cartesian straitjacket precludes.
Matthias
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk