Subject: [ggl] space partitioning
From: Adam Wulkiewicz (adam.wulkiewicz)
Date: 2010-08-17 12:19:43
Barend Gehrels wrote:
>>> In the R-Tree implementation which is already there, all objects are
>>> referred to an ID (a template parameter, usually an int) and you get
>>> ID-s back. This works quite well and avoids creating copies of (often
>>> large) geometries. How will that work in your design?
>> Alternatively it could be a pointer/iterator. Btw, do you write about
>> internals or the interface too? I'd like to avoid returning IDs to the
>> user. I'd rather use iterators and make interface similar to the one
>> in std containers.
> O yes, sure, sorry. The current rtree interface returns a deque of ID's.
> That is not what we wanted. An interface with iterators and similar to
> containers is much better. We (internally) discussed this before.
> However, I here meant the ID instead of the object itself. I think that
> is OK.
> It will be a challenge to get the interface exactly right.
>> Do you have a container of geometries inside R-Tree or it's provided
>> by the user? Is your R-Tree a container or just spacial index with IDs
>> of elements in this user-defined container?
> No, the geometrires are not stored inside the RTree, just the boxes. So
> it is a spatial index with ID's of elements.
Isn't this implementation limited to containers with random access
iterators? Are you planning to do a few versions for different containers?
For points, do you store IDs as well?
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net