OK, I've looked at this some more.

Yeah, we definitely need to switch the types of the local variables to
use the correct value type.  I think that, plus what you've already
done, would answer my changes.  I switched a bit around in the last
stuff to "optimize" a couple of things that were done twice (a-b and
b-a), but I don't know that it was worth doing, compared to the
readability.

I still have to look to see what I think about having different methods
for different types.  Specifically, would we get the new one, or would
we have to write a new visitor that calls the double version?  I want to
make sure we benefit from the double precision.

andy

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Robert Osfield
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 9:07 AM
To: OpenSceneGraph Submissions
Subject: Re: [osg-submissions] try doubles for
mathinLineSegment::intersect() methods

The first step towards Vec3d support in LineSegment I have introduced
a typedef into LineSegment:

        typedef Vec3d vec_type;
        typedef vec_type::value_type value_type;

I have also changed various methods and intenals of LineSegment to use
these typedefs rather than just Vec3.  Its a first step as I haven't
changed all the internals to use floats - they should now use the
value_type method.  We should also have several intersect functions,
ones with float/Vec3f and ones with double/Vec3d to ensure that
calling code can remain using the types that suit the calling code.

I have checked these changes as they stand to get the ball rolling.
Andy's changes need to be reviewed against mine, and a new set of
changes made to complete the work above.

Robert.
_______________________________________________
osg-submissions mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegr
aph.org
_______________________________________________
osg-submissions mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org

Reply via email to