Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring? |

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

*To*: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Subject*: Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?*From*: Hauke Heibel <hauke.heibel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:33:53 +0200*Dkim-signature*: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=oHr35D5AG00N/tnd8vSv72Osbxx//z2E9E+OzQvUw0I=; b=Jf3F+qbq5rulMpWRss0MUA33tbYesyMmWeA7y7wJN8y8eCqPopoSIckpIP3ltwkDRA +CQLy04CHT8yPU/8LmBtrutnCihykK73NYNjz2H899eEfaOfI1ynfBzZU3T/pabiT2Tl D095yiZ1XwUe0kg9VaN8C0Egb4pZNAg5Qiufo=*Domainkey-signature*: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=voDiOujPqvhPGgPKNp+AUnEaQwC2zYEemvoVwyx8Gee244X/8OKdxE0+Cpi4rtoMey /ph+wuYlo68GDF1fpd/kIjpIW2TDTGtimKHXLDxqCTkJhiW9siyQLtZisLRMmCcYGJIT O//N5Cw0aiddO1ypP47du/It+47fkrl0+ymLc=

Here is an initial patch. It does not yet fix everything and actually lead to more problems and issues. Currently, this operator is causing a little head-ache template<typename OtherDerived> friend inline AffineTransformType Translation::operator*(const EigenBase<OtherDerived>& linear, const Translation& t) In particular because it is also used for transformations. It got really bad since I added this change to RotationBase inline Transform<Scalar,Dim,Isometry> operator*(const Translation<Scalar,Dim>& t) const .... which makes sense for me but what happens now is this ... Affine = Affine * (Quaternion * Translation) Affine = Affine * Isometry( MatrixRepresentingQuaternion * Translation ) Affine = Affine * Isometry( Affine !?!? ) <-- crash I would suggest Translation gets an operator*(const Transform<...>& M, const Translation& t) and the result is a Transform<...>. - Hauke

**Attachment:
geo.patch**

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Hauke Heibel

**References**:**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Manuel Yguel

**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Hauke Heibel

**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Hauke Heibel

**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Hauke Heibel

**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Hauke Heibel

**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Messages sorted by:**[ date | thread ]- Prev by Date:
**Re: [eigen] [eigen3] .cwise() vs .array() and static assertion** - Next by Date:
**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?** - Previous by thread:
**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?** - Next by thread:
**Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?**

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