Re: [boost] Boost.ntree_container (bi_tree, quad_tree, oct_tree, etc ptr containers) Is there any interest in this?

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.ntree_container (bi_tree, quad_tree, oct_tree, etc ptr containers) Is there any interest in this?
From: Dan Walters (dan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-10 20:01:35

Hi all,

This is my current implementation of an oct tree that I am using on a
project I am working on. It is a templated oct tree which serves as a
pointer container. There is usage shown in the main() function at the
bottom of the sample.

http://codepad.org/yIAblSDN

Please bear in mind it is not fully optimized or std compliant, just put
together for a project but shows the intended basic functionality and
method.

Compatibility with boost geometry is a great suggestion. Again, I am
mindful of defining the boundaries of this library, but if it makes sense
then template specialization or utility code could be provided to use the
libraries together easily and elegantly.

k-d trees are very interesting, and if discussion found these potentially
useful enough, they would certainly belong in the same library.

I think, in any context, this should be thought of as a container library
above all else and would be potentially useful not just in game or geometry
programming, but open to use where ever useful, including as a memory
efficient pointer container for sparsely populated multidimensional arrays.

Best wishes,

Dan

On 10 March 2012 20:04, Daniel F. Savarese <dfs_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>
> In message <848178090.20120310163009_at_[hidden]>, pavel writes:
> >by the way i have a ready implementation of kd trees (if anyone is
> >interested):
> >
> >
> http://programmizm.sourceforge.net/blog/2011/a-practical-implementation-of-kd-
> >trees
>
> That's not exactly a generic implementation, nor one that is STL-friendly
> (e.g., no iterators).  For a more generic implementation that aims for STL
> interoperability where possible, see the header-only libssrckdtree library:
>   http://www.savarese.com/software/libssrckdtree/
>
> But this is off-topic for the thread, which--as I understand it--is
> concerned
> with fixed-size multidimensional spatial pointer containers oriented toward
> 3D applications, not variable-sized multidimensional spatial value
> containers
> applicable to arbitrary domains.
>
> daniel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>