Subject: [ggl] space partitioning
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz)
Date: 2010-09-10 17:44:11
On 17/08/10 18:04, Barend Gehrels wrote:
>> I'd like to implement kd-tree, quadtree/octree/... and regular grid
>> because these are data structures I've been playing with. Is it ok? Or
>> maby should we design one spacial index?
> For your information, Federico (the student who built the indexes in
> 2008) did implement a quadtree implementation as well.
I think it is a good idea to take a look at Frederico's work and make
use of it. It would be pity to waste his work.
> It is not yet in
> the extension folder, because I didn't rework the
> conventions/namings/etc, but I can provide it of course. Yes it is good
> to add the things that are available. I just forgot after a while.
By the way, Adam, I'd suggest you to take a look at
(please, use spaces, not tabs :-))
> I think it would be good if there is one library "interface" (Concept)
> with some different implementations. However, the r-tree implementation
> which is currently there does not follow this.
Barend, I thoroughly agree with you here.
>> Btw, do you plan to have some generic linear algebra in the library?
> There is some which might be given that name, but note that there is (at
> least one) another library being developed within Boost. That is a very
> promising one and I hope it is reviewed soon.
> As soon as that is sure, we might use that library for our vector/matrix
> calculations (also instead of the uBlas we're currently using).
Yes, the original plan was to keep using uBlas.
Once the Boost.LA is approved, we can switch.
-- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net