|Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Do we need geometry refactoring?
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 10:14:16 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ecz7H/GcQa2TW7FvLKiUIvRLwIiWZ0AQdZjH3R/eOGQ=; b=aMOvl2HT0v8A4LgE9G0oB48qbRESEi4s+vSoeDd0dr4Sb9udax/2qWKvw2b9XyR0O1 GNbsfC7uZsLWV5TZ5eJU1R/RgLuoosqvVTY9a/FH+rSjQBLQH8YSukuCPxJ061NOYIbF SH8rKu1nqUqYg0rVlqFf4nHbmQCd4wapurqCQ=
- 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=JNJ8XUF4f+OA6+S5nRuLhhRf5CiYNItHUcB3X422XE7hnZpUIteebnKIOETceMVgCF bkpGTXkQ1snXuohodHbtSZKJejLy5DlbmoR9SHE5q6JGMLVB0Zz+nWjKXg41gRP+a24N 88p0G3Cz4oUpuQNLa5g638WiPFXJhQH0BFs6I=
2010/8/3 Hauke Heibel <hauke.heibel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> - It is unintuitive that the most generic Transformation is affine
>> Let's focus on this point because it looks crucial to me. The most
>> generic transformation is definitely projective, there's no question
>> about that, the questions discussed here are:
>> a) what should the default value for Mode be?
>> b) what should the Transform3f (etc) typedefs stand for?
>> Obviously, a typedef named "Transform3f" has to use the default mode,
>> but at the same time that name "Transform3f" does suggest something
>> generic, whence the confusion in this discussion between "default" and
> Right, you nailed it. So, we agree that Transform3f is likely to
> suggest something generic.
>> What do you think about this plan:
>> - we just remove the Transform3f... typedefs. We just force the user
>> to use the mode-specific typedefs such as Affine3f, Projective3f, etc.
>> - we don't give Mode any default value.
>> - in the tutorials, we focus (at least at the start) on Affine
>> transforms, Affine3f etc, so that the intuitive idea that 3D-transform
>> * 3D-vector gives a 3D-vector. Of course we then do explain other
>> kinds of transform.
> Sound like a plan. Gael, do you have any opinion?
Hauke: the geo_hyperplane test fails to build at the moment, something
related to Transform and some matrix not having the right size. This
is most probably related to your change, no?
Also: the Hyperplane::transform() methods are still taking a
TransformTraits runtime parameter, which we probably want to get rid
> - Hauke