Subject: [ggl] spacial index
From: Barend Gehrels (barend)
Date: 2011-03-29 07:28:14
Hi Adam, Bruno,
I agree with more detailing the namespaces.
> It would be good to have various indexes inside geometry::index
> namespace to avoid redundant names:
> geometry::index::some_index::some_index<V> i;
This is inconvenient. It is not impossible (it will compile) but we've
had this before, within distance (the algorithm) and namespace distance.
What is possible is:
geometry::index::rtree<V> (for the rtree index)
This is also more intuitive. You mentioned this also below, so this is
probably what you mean.
> Furthermore I'd like to hide implementation deeper in the namespaces
> hierarchy. So maby a good idea is to have spatial index related code
> in namespace geometry::index::details::some_index.
> We would have short path to what's most important:
> separated implementation hierarchy
> and spatial index variant implementation details, e.g. rstar related
> code, deeper
This looks all good to me.
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net