kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[hauptmech <hauptmech@xxxxxxxxx>]

After reading through vector2d.h and matrix3x3.h, I agree with Reece 
more or less. There is ambiguity in the word vector, between math 
vectors, spatial vectors, and c++ vectors. Context implies that VECTOR2 
refers math vectors, but then MATRIX3x3 * VECTOR2 is allowed which 
violates expectations.  POINT2 and SE2 or HOMOGENEOUS2  would set 
expectations better.

If you are working with homogeneous coordinates and want to operate at 
the math vector & matrix level of abstraction (often my preference) then 
using a VECTOR3 would be clearer than hacking a VECTOR2.


-Hauptmech

On 22/06/2019 9:28 PM, Tomasz Wlostowski wrote:
> On 22/06/2019 09:09, Greg Smith wrote:
>
> > I think the biggest point I am making is that, mathematically, a point
> > is identical to a vector from 0,0.
> Hi Greg & Reece,
>
> This is precisely the reason why we don't have separate point and vector
> classes.
>
> Tom
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp