Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread |

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives ]

*To*: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Subject*: Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread*From*: Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 14:07:04 +0200*Dkim-signature*: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=uAnDMD/FrZWQnjoE9Lz5qooy7XNk9pYy/UrWJxo0KUY=; b=enOmRdKPcRe0N5OSAX2WwZk3wpsdI5CBcghsOQJxtouYWJQhU8un3pokjDRV4z/5RW fZBE223r72FKH5rFufLBp5is3SKoft3qwx+H4/3vKwxUzCzJdwuf1780xkwE9ti3yfwI RrpVOWFnpdqTgFSM3jryOr53JNlTBpT8RJ8oU=*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; b=Hvz8fiSFBnhTJxSFFAtr879Iao7xnDXpLmOAuHOONo1JJLOWDDsg99YnlJGQKhpedg 7eIpsQGwtrooMeblkIs+cypvGzqKjmRUHgrn+Ls22uxJqK33jRwNG7Jzh+A7iO5lMBXh VvOZRcy7DfVpPGMbuW+JJgZD3YUMaVb0Vt0mA=

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2009/9/18 Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>: >> maybe it is still worth keeping Scalar so that one can easily declare >> a DualQuaternion: >> >> DualQuaternion<float> dq; >> >> For an example of this technique have a look at my auto-diff module in >> unsupported/. > > OK > >> >> Finally, do you think Quaternion should be implemented this way as >> well ? I mean for DualQuaternion these two operators are really useful >> (unlike for Quaternion where slerp is really what you should use), and >> since dualquat are larger high efficiency require ET (again unlike >> Quaternion). > > I think it's worth doing the same for Quaternion for consistency. I agree on the consistency reason. > If > DualQuaternion has an operator+, then Quaternion should too. Rohit > mentioned that nlerp is also wanted for Quaternion. Then there is the > question of whether it should return by value or using your trick, > well i think that your trick brings more benefits (e.g. mapping > expressions) so once we have the DualQuaternion impl it's worth > porting to Quaternion... also it's a more consistent API: if > DualQuaternion can Map any xpr, so should Quaternion. Note that mapping the coefficients of a Quaternion or DualQuaternion seems to be quite dangerous because this assume a convention for the storage order of the coeffs and there is no such standard. gael

**References**:**[eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread***From:*Rohit Garg

**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread***From:*Rohit Garg

**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread***From:*Rohit Garg

**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread***From:*Rohit Garg

**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread***From:*Gael Guennebaud

**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread***From:*Gael Guennebaud

**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Messages sorted by:**[ date | thread ]- Prev by Date:
**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread** - Next by Date:
**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread** - Previous by thread:
**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread** - Next by thread:
**Re: [eigen] Rigid Transformations in eigen: discussion thread**

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