Subject: Re: [boost] Voronoi benchmark update
From: Sebastien Loriot (GeometryFactory) (sloriot.ml_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-30 12:04:50
it seems I missed your email, sorry for the delay.
On 03/21/2013 12:29 AM, Andrii Sydorchuk wrote:
> Hi Sebastien,
> Thanks for your update. I will rerun the benchmarks and update the
> documentation for the upcoming Boost release.
> It will be also helpful if you provide the code snippet to evaluate
> Voronoivertex coordinates based on the
> Delaunay triangle.
There is a dual member function, but it requires to use an exact kernel
for the construction. So the best way to achieve this is to use the
However, I'm not sure about what output you want me to create once the
points are computed.
I think I can produce a boost graph, but this induces an additional
construction while the triangulation already hold the combinatorial
of the Voronoi.
> Last time I was not able to find one in CGAL (4.0) documentation.
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Sebastien Loriot<sloriot.ml_at_[hidden]>wrote:
>> I'm involved in the CGAL Project, and saw the Voronoi benchmark.
>> It would be nice if you could change the CGAL code slightly, as it is
>> not as bad as it currently seems. Attached is the diff to
>> the trunk of boost.
>> Concerning the Voronoi diagram of points, a CGAL user, would
>> use the Delaunay_triangulation_2 class.
>> Concerning the Voronoi diagram of segments (that do not intersect)
>> one would make a better choice for number types and traits classes.
>> Also one better first inserts the endpoints and then the segments
>> (I agree, this should definitely go into a member function).
>> Admittedly our examples could be better.
>> Unsubscribe& other changes:
> Unsubscribe& other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost