| 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: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:03:28 -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=CU1u6TOytHkz9/oepIw/kohUCGsVotkYVSytHa8/9iA=; b=UptU1PwYGIrPWNEsn48oaegZRnGiFupfAhEHy3bjjrdH8JZAcb8OPdBgnpSt6mdLgq J8l+4VzNnpxskIOgpwvO+KMiDF10+fE/QGY50/ltaVQHnJyCLRvCoaSVURgIWk9qtaC1 p+dP2xo8gb/Hh4pU+xQH4Nxjb95WnluHGt0dc=
- 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=vQKuz5uKovK2npI1ObgkyG+8BhVrFht6LJx1gmyOBMQoLn5y4KujnBFTPuDSLyTnlV 0c7DfMo6R4ctg0C0+7czNp/XtecW+KeQjHygVB7b8XCBMQBXMDJ/QvPELsikjMtpEXYA Ycu4sWX+qlNa8rr+BCZnOH5NSHibE8buvU7YI=
2010/8/16 Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>:
> 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
>>> "generic".
>>
>> 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?
Ah, great, Gael had fixed that already, I should have grabbed the
newest changes.
The question below about transform() still remains, though.
Benoit
>
> Also: the Hyperplane::transform() methods are still taking a
> TransformTraits runtime parameter, which we probably want to get rid
> of.
>
> Benoit
>
>>
>> - Hauke
>>
>>
>>
>