Geometry :

duzy

--
Duzy Chan
http://duzy.info
On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Barend Gehrels
<barend.gehrels_at_[hidden]>wrote:
>  hi,
>
>
> On 3-12-2009 13:32, Bruno Lalande wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>  So I propose namespace shape for the neutrally-named collection of shapes.
>
> We then get:
> boost::geometry::shape::point<...> // as we have it now in boost::geometry
> boost::geometry::shape::polygon<...> // as we have it now in
>
>  It's better than "geometry" indeed. However maybe an even better name
> would be "model", since those geometries model the concepts GGL
> defines. It would state more clearly that those shapes are not mere
> shapes but are also examples of models for our concepts.
>
>
> Much later, this has been done.
>
> For example: boost::geometry::point_xy is now
> boost::geometry::model::point_xy
>
> So please update your sources, or (recommended) a SVN tag has been created
> just before updating, so the most recent version before this change is here:
>
>
> https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox-tags/geometry/boost-geometry-0.7.0/
> The proposal contained more namespace renamals, I assume that this is still
> agreed by everyone.
>
> 1) boost::geometry::d3::point (for current point_3d) still to be done, but
> this should (I think) still be in namespace model
> 2) algorithm::distance instead of distance
> 3) and also "ogc::distance". But it might be that "st::distance" is seen as
> a more appropriate name, because all spatial databases use it like that
> (ST_Distance, STDistance(), etc).
> 4) singular names, no plural names (also for folders?)
>
>
> Regards, Barend
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ggl mailing list
> ggl_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ggl
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/ggl/attachments/20101129/bd082bab/attachment.html