Re: [eigen] Bounding Volume Hierarchies
• To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Subject: Re: [eigen] Bounding Volume Hierarchies
• From: Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 21:32:03 +0100
• Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=t5eAQnPXvq9f6bQURT8ohgbgtRaIwq7BsezBJkXounzOKiOk0MEiqkQ8KCM6ZySssL ghn6mk8SHu4mu6B7Q0/F7xVUxXd7K9umgmLuynAy4+g+VWGPG0Y0Fj+rRixP1k5Rtpkw pag7NElVZK7hrrLy4gYrAJ7o8fC0RKS5Z2bFI=

```On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2009/3/6 Ilya Baran <baran37@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> I prefer reading "(a | b) & (c | d)" to
>> "(a.union(b)).intersection(c.union(d))", but it's not a strong
>> preference (and, of course, your call at that).
>
>
>> For explicit names,
>> I'd suggest "union" and "intersection" for operator| and operator& and
>> "unite" and "intersect" for operator|= and operator&= (rather than the
>> current "extend" and "clamp").
>
> +1

"union" and "intersection" are the obvious choices, "unite" is good
too. However, "intersect" is confusing because in my brain it would
return true or false whether the two boxes intersect or not. This is
why I used "clamp". There is also "crop" , yeah, I know that's not
better... (about unite vs extend, that's because I did not thought

gael

```

 Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+ http://listengine.tuxfamily.org/