Subject: [ggl] incorrect result for an intersection
From: Arash Partow (arash)
Date: 2011-04-17 00:48:25
Simonson, Lucanus J wrote:
> Is that so? What is something more reasonable? I'm not a big believer in the idea of templating the number type of a non-robust computational geometry algorithm and substituting infinite precision or lazy exact data types. I know it can be done, I'm just not impressed with the results. Does the license they use allow such modification? Does it allow redistribution? What about relicensing? Are these academic uses of GPC?
Yest it is so Luke. I've done it others have done it and it works and works quite well, there are some changes needed to the ds's to make it a faster (as i mentioned previously), and for a fee of a gift to the the university of Manchester (which btw is tax deductible if you're a resident of the commonwealth) you can change whatever you want and redistribute in binary form for commercial purposes on as many projects as you like (its even less if you're an indie developer).
> If fixing everything wrong with GPC is trivial than GPC itself is surely trivail. Why would someone with a commerical purpose in mind start with a for profit license encumbered source code like GPC, which is itself trivial?
Luke its not all about fixing things that are wrong, merely changing some of the underlying assumptions to better suite whatever it is you want from the library. Perhaps you might not find it worthwhile, but others do. btw if you ever get a chance to see their licensee list you'd be quite surprised (wink wink ^M^Mtel) :D
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net