Re: [boost] Another GGL review

Subject: Re: [boost] Another GGL review
From: Phil Endecott (spam_from_boost_dev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-17 13:59:08

Jonathan Franklin wrote:
> For the purposes of my own review, I'm trying to decide whether I
> think the library should be accepted without a spatial index.  Would
> anyone like to sway my opinion one way or the other?

Hi Jon,

I have a slightly unconventional spatial index that I would like one 
day to submit to Boost; I was hoping that we would have a Boost 
geometry framework that I could port it to, and as you may have noticed 
I'm unhappy that we instead have two incompatible ones...

My index is actually an adaptor that uses Z-curves to make a 1D 
container (e.g. std::map, or for read-only access a memory-mapped file) 
efficiently accessible as a 2D (or potentially higher dimension) 
container.  A restriction of the Z-curve method is that it does not 
work with floating-point coordinates...

I suggest that the absence of a spatial index should not be a reason 
for rejecting GGL.  It might be that adding some concepts to support 
this could be appropriate; for example, Barend, what requirements does 
the spatial index extension to your union/intersection algorithm have?  
Are they expressed as concepts?

Phil.