On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Derek Gaston <[email protected]> wrote: > > To "fix" this I propose using relative_fuzzy_equals() like so: > > if (!(elem->point(n) - elem->point(0)).relative_fuzzy_equals((cached_nodes[n] > - cached_nodes[0]))) > > But of course this could have the bad side effect of false positives... ie > two elements that are _extremely_ similar but not exactly and still pass this > check. > > So what do you guys think? Is this a valid thing to do... or is it just too > unsafe? Is there a better option?
Good catch. I'll let Roy answer since he wrote that code, but I think what you propose doing sounds fine. You can specify a tolerance to relative_fuzzy_equals as well if you want to make it pretty precise. -- John ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Nokia and AT&T present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest Create new apps & games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in U.S. and Canada $10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Libmesh-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
