Rolf Bode-Meyer wrote: > 2010/4/26 Sebastian Klein <[email protected]>: >> Rolf Bode-Meyer wrote: >>> I think that slowly but surely I've gone mad. I'm trying to understand >>> org.openstreetmap.josm.data.osm.BBox.inside(BBox b) for over an hour >>> now, but I just don't get it. >>> In both of the following cases inside called from the larger with the >>> smaller as argument it returns true. >>> +---------+ +-------+ >>> | +-----+ | | +----+-+ >>> | | | | | | | | >>> | | | | | | | | >>> | +-----+ | | +----+-+ >>> +---------+ +-------+ >> It's a classical rectangle "intersects" test, so the function should >> better be renamed... >> This did not cause any misbehaviour because it is used just once and in >> that context it works correctly. > > I don't know about the classic tests and for me at least "lies fully > within" is no intersection.
It is, if you view the bbox as an area and not as the surrounding line. > But if it's an intersection test, it > should really be renamed - though there already is an intersects > method which makes use of inside() ... > It's unfortune that stuff isn't commented. Done: http://josm.openstreetmap.de/changeset/3209 > Am I correct that for a point value where min==max, intersects is > always a contains? Sure. __ Sebastian _______________________________________________ josm-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/josm-dev
