Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc] Interest check for 3d geometry proposal
From: Phil Endecott (spam_from_boost_dev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-27 07:23:15
Kornel Kisielewicz <kornel.kisielewicz_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> One example is object hierarchy via oct or kd trees.
Would you like to implement these spatial containers? I think this
would be a very useful contribution. Ideally your implementation would
be generic, i.e. usable with fixed-size point types or the
variable-size uBLAS types; at the end of the project we would then be
able to evaluate the benefit of removing the size field. 2D & 3D please.
FWIW here's my take on the issues being discussed in this thread:
- Not every platform has a GPU on to which work can be offloaded.
- Although I doubt that wasting a word on a size field has much effect
on speed, I would want to avoid it when dealing with large collections
of points because of the memory overhead.
- I have using uBLAS for some simple 2D matrix transformation and found
it a little bit more difficult than I expected; a special-purpose API,
even if implemented as a thin wrapper around uBLAS or something else,
would have the benefit of simplifying things for the end user.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk