CGAL users discussion list

[Sylvain Pion <>]

The lack of static filters for the power tests probably explains
a good share of this difference.

Manuel Caroli wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the weighted Delaunay triangulation has some additional overhead due to 
> points that can be hidden. If you have a lot of hidden points this might 
> have a considerable effect on running times. Also maybe you profit from 
> some optimizations in Delaunay triangulation but not in the weighted 
> Delaunay triangulation.
>
> Without more information about your problem and your code and I cannot 
> tell you more than the above speculations.
>
> best
>
> Manuel
>
>
> 400555 wrote:
> > Hello !
> >
> > Could you say your opinion about:
> >
> > I tried to compare performance between using CGAL Delaunay and Regular 
> > triangulation with weighted points.
> >
> > I rebuilt it 200.000 times for moving points (I know that rebuilding 
> > is not best option) and Delaunay takes 17 sec but weighted one - 64 
> > seconds.
> > I don't understand why, difference is only that weighted one considers 
> > about weight which is included in determinant (which defines "in 
> > circle" criteria), please correct me if I am wrong.
> > So I was not expected so much time difference between them.
> >
> > Do you know why it happen?
> >
> > Thank you.

--
Sylvain Pion
INRIA Sophia-Antipolis
Geometrica Project-Team
CGAL, http://cgal.org/