yade-dev team mailing list archive
-
yade-dev team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #14474
Re: Yade is not compatible with CGAL_4.13
-
To:
yade-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
From:
Janek Kozicki <janek_listy@xxxxx>
-
Date:
Mon, 7 Jan 2019 13:44:01 +0100
-
Face:
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
-
In-reply-to:
<CANFfKpH-fGpThcuzqSzO7k8QkqYy5gCiq6KZ9J9-W1bNumzj+w@mail.gmail.com>
Bruno Chareyre said: (by the date of Sun, 6 Jan 2019 15:34:11 +0100)
> > Hi Janek,
> > I think that was the right fix, thanks.
> > Note that yade is not using the periodic triangulation implemented in CGAL
> > [1] so there is no question on that point afaik.
> > Bruno
good, great to know. During the migration I am not committing
anything to gitlab. I also will wait until you synchronize my commits
on github to gitlab :)
> > [1] that's because yade included periodicity years before cgal. I actually
> > implemented a periodicity based on cgal's non-periodic triangulation. Cgal
> > devs made periodic regular triangulation available more recently -
> > triggered by me for a part - but it's still not used in yade. Hopefully it
> > will be used one day but the refactoring it implies is a bit daunting.
Before we even think about doing this, let's first make sure that
whatever we modify has working tests :)
> I forgot to answer the test coverage question: no, move() is not covered by
> any test, even indirectly.
> The function is not used in other parts of the code currently.
That is one of the test cases which I want to discuss in the
compatibility thread :)
--
Janek Kozicki
Follow ups
References