> I did think about changing the vector to a map. Then, i'd have to change the
> attributes of the structures DCEL_Vertex, etc. And the accessing code will
> become lengthier (and non-intuitive maybe?). Also, for edges the ID is not
> an integer, it's a pair of integers (the IDs of the two constituent
> vertices). Thus map for that would become ugly. So is it okay if i stick
> with vectors?
Sure. You considered the alternatives well and decided to use the
vector. That's OK.
BTW, you can use complex structures as keys for maps too. They only
need to have a comparison operator.
> Whenever i need to add/remove/modify (remove functions will be trickier than
> the add and modify functions?) information in the meshes, i'd have to update
> both the DCEL and the native structure. So essentially, the access functions
> in the PolygonalMesh class will update both the DCEL and the rt_bot_internal
> structure? I will be adding these functions as i write the mesh healing
> algorithms.
You should have virtual protected methods in PolygonialMesh to update
the native structures.
Regards,
Daniel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic
patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are
consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow,
J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity
planning reports. https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/305295220;132659582;e
_______________________________________________
BRL-CAD Developer mailing list
brlcad-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/brlcad-devel
