Op wo 28 nov. 2018 om 20:47 schreef Stefan Monnier <[email protected] >:
> > Would it make sense to adjust this coefficient based on distance, then? > I.e. when the "straight line to destination" is hundreds of km, use > a value around 1.4/1.5, but only use 1.2/1.3 or so when the distance is > down to a handful of kilometers? > > Like Poutnik also mentions: Only theoretically. There is another reason why it is not logical to mix those, apart from the "programming complexities". If you have to drive > 200 km, the optimizations in begin and end (using 1.2 or 1.3) might result in 1-2 minutes shorter travel time (again: in theory, think of the traffic lights or busy traffic, etc.) on a total travel time of perhaps 2-3 hours. Who cares? A better approach (I think) would be to use the coordinates of start and destiny. If the straight point to point, "as the bird flies", distance is below < 25 km, use a heuristic coefficient of 1.2 If the straight point to point, "as the bird flies", distance is 25 km < distance < 100 km, use 1.3 If the straight point to point, "as the bird flies", distance is > 100 km, use 1.4 Of course this is only a suggestion. It should be optimized (or user selectable). The heuristic-coefficient is read on OsmAnd start from the routing.xml, but that isn't a problem. All routing rules can be read on OsmAnd start, and as soon as the "geographic" distance is calculated, the route calculation with the specific heuristic-coefficient can start. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Osmand" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
