[mkgmap-dev] Work on is_in branch

Tue Feb 11 15:49:41 GMT 2020

Hi Ticker,

whatever you plan to do. I moved the code to the lib because it is easier to write a unit test.
I would not invest much time to avoid a few tests which only happen in very rare cases. Makes testing more complicated and code less readable.

Gerd

________________________________________
Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap at jagit.co.uk>
Gesendet: Dienstag, 11. Februar 2020 16:43
An: Development list for mkgmap
Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Work on is_in branch

Hi Gerd

I assume you mean towards moving some logic from IsInUtil to
IsInFunction.

Ticker

On Tue, 2020-02-11 at 15:41 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> Hi Ticker,
>
> okay, let's see where this goes...
>
> Gerd
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag
> von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap at jagit.co.uk>
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 11. Februar 2020 16:36
> An: Development list for mkgmap
> Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Work on is_in branch
>
> Hi Gerd
>
> To take advantage of efficiency gains based on knowing what is being
> asked for, ie:
>
> - do the polygons need to be merged or can we do one-by-one.
> - can we answer correctly even of !W.isComplete().
> - can we stop early, eg ANY as soon as part is IN, ALL as soon as
> part
> is OUT, etc
>
> the top layers of code need to be with the method and its associated
> knowledge. I don't see any point in simply moving this into IsInUtil.
>
> I was going to take calcInsideness next and divide it into some
> library
> bits remaining in IsInUtil, and logic equivalent to the rest in
> IsInFunction.
>
> If you consider this is not the way to proceed, then I'd still like
> patch applied anyway, firstly because it contains other changes
> unrelated to this, secondly so that the code exists in SVN. I'll then
> immediately do another patch that removes the canStop logic etc and
> the
> POINT code that migrated here and restore it to just testing the
> composite flags.
>
> Ticker
>
> On Tue, 2020-02-11 at 14:11 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > sorry, something is broken in the mail system.
> > The latest posts don't appear on nabble (1) and my answers to
> > existing threads are rejected.
> >
> > @Ticker: I'd prefer to do the merge and I think it should be done
> > in
> > IsInUtil. Your patch is_in-function_v7.patch goes in the opposite
> > direction.
> > Not sure what you plan to do now?
> >
> > Gerd
> >
> > (1) http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Mkgmap-Development-f5324443.html
> > _______________________________________________
> > mkgmap-dev mailing list
> > mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev