CGAL users discussion list

[Vitaliy <>]

Sylvain wrote: Obviously Regular cannot be faster than Delaunay

As I understand, if we know that no any hidden vertices will appear (than we can do not bother about them),

then regular and Delaunay should take the same time. Am I right?

Vitaliy.

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Sylvain Pion <> wrote:

400555 wrote:

Thank you for answer !

Manuel, I checked out hidden vertices number - no any hidden vertices at all.
Also I read manual but still don't understand when vertex could become hidden, could anyone explain it in easy words or show an example.

/Manuel wrote: Also maybe you profit from some optimizations in Delaunay triangulation../
/
/
/Manuel, what kind of optimization do you mean? Inside of CGAL engine or on my side? On my own side I don't do any optimization. All what I do - just insert list of points one by one and apply info for each of them./

/Sylvain wrote: The lack of static filters for the power tests.../

I don't get what does it mean? And is it possible to avoid it?

Sorry for many questions.

Thank you for answerers.

I am afraid it is all on CGAL's side, there is not much you can do easily.
Obviously Regular cannot be faster than Delaunay, but the slow down
factor could be greatly reduced.  It just needs some work, which has
not been done yet.

--
Sylvain Pion
INRIA Sophia-Antipolis
Geometrica Project-Team
CGAL, http://cgal.org/
--
You are currently subscribed to cgal-discuss.
To unsubscribe or access the archives, go to
https://lists-sop.inria.fr/wws/info/cgal-discuss