Subject: Re: [boost] GGL review (JTF)
From: Jonathan Franklin (franklin.jonathan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-28 16:32:51
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 5:21 AM, Barend Gehrels <barend_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> The reason for the assign with 4 functions
> is to assign the sphere completely, in one call.
> I do not understand exactly
> what you dislike, but probably it was something that seems to be not used or
Simply that the 2- and 3-type overloads completely assign 2- and 3-d
geometries respectively. I would prefer the 4-type version to
completely assign a 4-d geometry. Perhaps the interface already
supports this (not the implementation), since the function is
overloaded on the geometry type.
>> The example code on the main page didn't compile, which isn't a
>> problem in and of itself.
> This is surprising, as all examples are extracted from real, compiling
> code... Be it, indeed, that headerfiles are not extracted (more reviewers
> have mentioned this and this will be addressed)
There was nothing wrong w/ the code itself. The issue was that it
required headers, other than ggl.hpp, to compile. It took a bit of
leg-work to figure out what I needed to include.
> We understand the flaws and drawbacks of the documentation, but for your
> information, the "modules" page lists all of the algorithms available....
I went back later, and was able to find the algorithm in question from
this page. Thanks!
>> However, it is a shame that the library lacks a first-class spatial
>> index capability in it's present state (e.g. what is up for review). ...
> It is available as an extension, the reasons for non-inclusion were:
> - we want to improve performance
> - we want to enhance the interface
So will it be moved *into* the library-proper at some point, or will
it always remain an extension?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk