| [eigen] Re: conversions in geometry module |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [eigen] Re: conversions in geometry module
- From: "Benoit Jacob" <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 19:19:41 +0100
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=457HPeBhoc05TjSAYyK703BPoFJrlPDhechHE/AOdc8=; b=QNOSQEv8VvaCy43aNBnrUO6JX3aN2vKiW6mwG29EUjnbiVjSacTfkBHT4guOuq22AI mCLgA7UsxdtXBv0kRCR2J3zuPqODQ4sOjNZd/hhZEZ4FvWQemVyQQLU2XgPG3zpx8oxf zYhxEGB/i+jDirDem8ZZXh1ewI9fDB1uFHhEk=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=xk446hYvDbojsiQ9LasPLPXhn+mu2NecPUE6Ca/xhG52hXrFmBTz/34zcdBH2hzw3n JPwd+6zVqPGut4DgrXAQO3bemiOaVTkVwVo82tRTWuvN3G9FdQmSULbdrdLUnY9JmS45 J2Xr7DAGou/ykd3LyxFI1dhg2+PzlyY8NOxyQ=
OK, I committed.
There was an old commented-out operator= taking rotation. I re-enabled
that. Please tell me if there was any reason it was disabled.
Cheers,
Benoit
2008/12/6 Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>:
> specifically, he tried to do:
> Eigen::Transform3f t = Eigen::Translation3f(1.0f, 2.0f, 0.0f);
>
> and that failed to compile because gcc wanted to use a conversion
> constructor here.
> Instead with current Eigen he has to do
> Eigen::Transform3f t;
> t = Eigen::Translation3f(1.0f, 2.0f, 0.0f);
>
> I'd fix it myself but I want to make sure it's not conflicting with
> another design aspect...
>
> Cheers,
> Benoit
>
> 2008/12/6 Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> Hi Gael,
>>
>> today a user on IRC was puzzled because Translation's couldn't be
>> casted to Transform's.
>>
>> Is there any specific reason why the Transform class doesn't have (at
>> least explicit) constructors taking Translation?
>> Same question for Rotation types, etc?
>>
>> Any opinion on whether such constructors should be explicit? (Somehow
>> if have a rough feeling that they should)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Benoit
>>
>
---