Re: [mkgmap-dev] Gaps in surfaces
Hi Gerd Sorry - bit hasty in my reply I need to look at the other places that use DELTA_SHIFT and check their arithmetic/rounding etc is consistent with the corrected highPrecCoord and uniform in rounding behaviour. Ticker On Fri, 2023-10-06 at 16:15 +0100, Ticker Berkin wrote: > Hi Gerd > > My change to toMapUnit should be almost undetectable. Imagining mapUnits [x] > as degrees over > the > real range -2.5 .. +2.5, the original implementation resulted in: > > -2.5 < [-2] <= -1.5 < [-1] <= -0.5 < [0] < -0.5 <= [1] < +1.5 <= [2] < > +2.5 > > I've changed it to give: > > -2.5 <= [-2] < -1.5 <- [-1] < -0.5 <= [0] < -0.5 <= [1] < +1.5 <= [2] < > +2.5 > > The change to highPrecCoord is so that 64 highPrecCoords are exactly within > the appropriate > mapUnit, with deltas of -31..+32 according to the existing delta calculations. > > Ticker > > On Fri, 2023-10-06 at 14:34 +, Gerd Petermann wrote: > > Hi Ticker, > > > > your patch rounds the problematic point to a different position, the same > > that is assigned > > to > > the new Coord instance that is derived from the cutOutInnerPolygons() method > > which involves singularAreaToPoints() and thus another place where rounding > > happens: > > int latHp = (int)Math.round(res[1] * > > (1< > int lonHp = (int)Math.round(res[0] * > > (1< > > > I think we have to check all nodes which are part of an inner and change > > position because of > > your different rounding method, right? I wouldn't be surprised to find > > cases where a gap > > occurs > > with (just) your patch. I'll try to find an example... > > If I can't we may just use your patch, although it's much harder to > > understand compared to > > the > > original code. > > > > Gerd > > ___ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk > https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev ___ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Re: [mkgmap-dev] Gaps in surfaces
Hi Gerd My change to toMapUnit should be almost undetectable. Imagining mapUnits [x] as degrees over the real range -2.5 .. +2.5, the original implementation resulted in: -2.5 < [-2] <= -1.5 < [-1] <= -0.5 < [0] < -0.5 <= [1] < +1.5 <= [2] < +2.5 I've changed it to give: -2.5 <= [-2] < -1.5 <- [-1] < -0.5 <= [0] < -0.5 <= [1] < +1.5 <= [2] < +2.5 The change to highPrecCoord is so that 64 highPrecCoords are exactly within the appropriate mapUnit, with deltas of -31..+32 according to the existing delta calculations. Ticker On Fri, 2023-10-06 at 14:34 +, Gerd Petermann wrote: > Hi Ticker, > > your patch rounds the problematic point to a different position, the same > that is assigned to > the new Coord instance that is derived from the cutOutInnerPolygons() method > which involves singularAreaToPoints() and thus another place where rounding > happens: > int latHp = (int)Math.round(res[1] * > (1< int lonHp = (int)Math.round(res[0] * > (1< > I think we have to check all nodes which are part of an inner and change > position because of > your different rounding method, right? I wouldn't be surprised to find cases > where a gap > occurs > with (just) your patch. I'll try to find an example... > If I can't we may just use your patch, although it's much harder to > understand compared to the > original code. > > Gerd ___ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Re: [mkgmap-dev] Gaps in surfaces
Hi Ticker,
your patch rounds the problematic point to a different position, the same that
is assigned to the new Coord instance that is derived from the
cutOutInnerPolygons() method
which involves singularAreaToPoints() and thus another place where rounding
happens:
int latHp = (int)Math.round(res[1] *
(1< im Auftrag von Ticker
Berkin
Gesendet: Freitag, 6. Oktober 2023 16:19
An: Development list for mkgmap
Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Gaps in surfaces
Hi Gerd
I've now looked at your example (mp-gap2.osm). With my toMapUnit/toHighPrec
patch the problem
almost disappears. I don't see any significant difference when I also apply
your mp-cut-coord-
pool.patch.
I can't see a way of fixing these gaps/overlaps without disabling a lot of
filter point-removal,
maybe by setting Coord.preserved() and ensuring added points for polygon
cutting are on both the
inner and outer polygon, which I thought they were, with the algorithm cutting
through the
complete structure and then bits being merged later if possible.
Ticker
On Thu, 2023-10-05 at 16:37 +0100, Ticker Berkin wrote:
> Hi Gerd
>
> I've changed the way mapUnit and highPrec Coords are calculated slightly so
> that the exact 1/2
> unit boundary values are consistent between negative and positive. This gets
> rid of my couple
> of
> abnormalities with a -32 delta. The old method added or subtracted 1/2 to
> make ((int)double)
> do
> rounding, which assigns the exact 1/2 to the larger abs value.
>
> toHighPrec(), as in yesterdays change, keeps its bounds consistent with the
> mapUnit it is
> splitting up but is now coded in a similar way to toMapUnit.
>
> I think rounding to get MapUnits is a mistake but changing it now could have
> drastic
> consequences, it should have been floorToNegInfinity, giving the nice cyclic
> scale -128..+127
> <<
> 24. As it is, we get -128..+128 << 24.
>
> Equator & Grenwhich Meridian behave well, but I've always had doubts about
> behaviour around
> 128
>
> Hope this makes sense - patch attached
>
> Sorry, haven't thought about the actual problem with the gaps yet.
>
> Ticker
>
> On Thu, 2023-10-05 at 07:30 +, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> > Hi Ticker,
> >
> > reg. the change in toHighPrec() : I must confess that I never doubted why
> > positive values
> > should be rounded differently to negative values.
> > This is also done in Utils.toMapUnit() and I just adapted that code. If you
> > still want to
> > change that I think Math.rint() would get you closer to the original
> > implementation.
> > Question is if or why this difference in rounding is/was needed. There
> > should be visible
> > effects near equator and at Greenwhich or at 180°.
> >
> > Anyhow, I don't think this is the solution for the gap problem which is
> > caused by further
> > conversions from highprec int to double and back.
> > An alternative solution for that problem would be the attached patch which
> > makes use of the
> > coord pool.
> > No idea which one has more effects on performance.
> >
> > Gerd
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: mkgmap-dev im Auftrag von
> > Ticker Berkin
> >
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. Oktober 2023 15:57
> > An: Development list for mkgmap
> > Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Gaps in surfaces
> >
> > Hi Gerd
> >
> > I've been thinking about how to stop the small ranges of decimal degrees
> > from generating
> > MapUnit/delta=+32 and MapUnit+1/delta=-32.
> >
> > Without changing the MapUnit value, but truncating the highPrec calc, eg,
> > in Coord.java
> >
> > private static int toHighPrec(double degrees) {
> > final double CVT_HP = ((double)(1 << HIGH_PREC_BITS)) / 360;
> > return (int)Math.floor(degrees * CVT_HP);
> > }
> >
> > this problem almost goes away, with deltas between -31 .. +32 except for 2
> > instances of
> > delta
> > of
> > -32 I get while building the Britain-and-ireland.osm.pbf. I need to work
> > out why these are
> > happening.
> >
> > Although it is unnatural to have this range rather than -32..+31, it
> > doesn't matter. It
> > probably
> > could be fixed by using Math.ceil instead or reversing where the delta goes.
> > getAlternativePositions() will generated delta values approx -48..+48.
> >
> > I don't get failures from LineClipperTest with this change.
> > I do get failures from GmapsuppTest, SimpleRouteTest & SortTest, but I
> > think these are not
> > significant to this issue.
> >
> > As far as the gap between areas is concerned, I haven't looked at this yet
> > but I'll see if
> > my
> > change has similar effects to your patch to Coord.
> >
> > Ticker
> >
> > On Wed, 2023-10-04 at 08:16 +, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> > > Hi Ticker,
> > >
> > > I've uploaded the test case: https://files.mkgmap.org.uk/detail/564
> > > I had to modify the data a bit since the default style doesn't render
> > > natural=heath
> > >
> > > Gerd
> > >
> > >
Re: [mkgmap-dev] Gaps in surfaces
Hi Gerd
I've now looked at your example (mp-gap2.osm). With my toMapUnit/toHighPrec
patch the problem
almost disappears. I don't see any significant difference when I also apply
your mp-cut-coord-
pool.patch.
I can't see a way of fixing these gaps/overlaps without disabling a lot of
filter point-removal,
maybe by setting Coord.preserved() and ensuring added points for polygon
cutting are on both the
inner and outer polygon, which I thought they were, with the algorithm cutting
through the
complete structure and then bits being merged later if possible.
Ticker
On Thu, 2023-10-05 at 16:37 +0100, Ticker Berkin wrote:
> Hi Gerd
>
> I've changed the way mapUnit and highPrec Coords are calculated slightly so
> that the exact 1/2
> unit boundary values are consistent between negative and positive. This gets
> rid of my couple
> of
> abnormalities with a -32 delta. The old method added or subtracted 1/2 to
> make ((int)double)
> do
> rounding, which assigns the exact 1/2 to the larger abs value.
>
> toHighPrec(), as in yesterdays change, keeps its bounds consistent with the
> mapUnit it is
> splitting up but is now coded in a similar way to toMapUnit.
>
> I think rounding to get MapUnits is a mistake but changing it now could have
> drastic
> consequences, it should have been floorToNegInfinity, giving the nice cyclic
> scale -128..+127
> <<
> 24. As it is, we get -128..+128 << 24.
>
> Equator & Grenwhich Meridian behave well, but I've always had doubts about
> behaviour around
> 128
>
> Hope this makes sense - patch attached
>
> Sorry, haven't thought about the actual problem with the gaps yet.
>
> Ticker
>
> On Thu, 2023-10-05 at 07:30 +, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> > Hi Ticker,
> >
> > reg. the change in toHighPrec() : I must confess that I never doubted why
> > positive values
> > should be rounded differently to negative values.
> > This is also done in Utils.toMapUnit() and I just adapted that code. If you
> > still want to
> > change that I think Math.rint() would get you closer to the original
> > implementation.
> > Question is if or why this difference in rounding is/was needed. There
> > should be visible
> > effects near equator and at Greenwhich or at 180°.
> >
> > Anyhow, I don't think this is the solution for the gap problem which is
> > caused by further
> > conversions from highprec int to double and back.
> > An alternative solution for that problem would be the attached patch which
> > makes use of the
> > coord pool.
> > No idea which one has more effects on performance.
> >
> > Gerd
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: mkgmap-dev im Auftrag von
> > Ticker Berkin
> >
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. Oktober 2023 15:57
> > An: Development list for mkgmap
> > Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Gaps in surfaces
> >
> > Hi Gerd
> >
> > I've been thinking about how to stop the small ranges of decimal degrees
> > from generating
> > MapUnit/delta=+32 and MapUnit+1/delta=-32.
> >
> > Without changing the MapUnit value, but truncating the highPrec calc, eg,
> > in Coord.java
> >
> > private static int toHighPrec(double degrees) {
> > final double CVT_HP = ((double)(1 << HIGH_PREC_BITS)) / 360;
> > return (int)Math.floor(degrees * CVT_HP);
> > }
> >
> > this problem almost goes away, with deltas between -31 .. +32 except for 2
> > instances of
> > delta
> > of
> > -32 I get while building the Britain-and-ireland.osm.pbf. I need to work
> > out why these are
> > happening.
> >
> > Although it is unnatural to have this range rather than -32..+31, it
> > doesn't matter. It
> > probably
> > could be fixed by using Math.ceil instead or reversing where the delta goes.
> > getAlternativePositions() will generated delta values approx -48..+48.
> >
> > I don't get failures from LineClipperTest with this change.
> > I do get failures from GmapsuppTest, SimpleRouteTest & SortTest, but I
> > think these are not
> > significant to this issue.
> >
> > As far as the gap between areas is concerned, I haven't looked at this yet
> > but I'll see if
> > my
> > change has similar effects to your patch to Coord.
> >
> > Ticker
> >
> > On Wed, 2023-10-04 at 08:16 +, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> > > Hi Ticker,
> > >
> > > I've uploaded the test case: https://files.mkgmap.org.uk/detail/564
> > > I had to modify the data a bit since the default style doesn't render
> > > natural=heath
> > >
> > > Gerd
> > >
> > >
> > > Von: mkgmap-dev im Auftrag von
> > > Gerd Petermann
> > >
> > > Gesendet: Montag, 2. Oktober 2023 16:58
> > > An: Development list for mkgmap
> > > Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Gaps in surfaces
> > >
> > > Hi Ticker,
> > >
> > > the word overflow might be confusing. The problem is that we want to use
> > > only 6 bits for
> > > the
> > > delta, but we store values from -32 .. 32.
> > > The special case with Michael example is that one coord
