Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cgal-discuss - [cgal-discuss] Half-edge representation, CGAL vs OpenMesh

Subject: CGAL users discussion list

List archive

[cgal-discuss] Half-edge representation, CGAL vs OpenMesh


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Nicholas Mario Wardhana <>
  • To:
  • Subject: [cgal-discuss] Half-edge representation, CGAL vs OpenMesh
  • Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 20:06:04 +0800
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=ggvhNn76UL75luM1ngHtujThseWTN7q/AzvYgDsTKIz33DxA8g1F4hH1vzAe1F7HAX KigXX0ZF6dUhmAVW0imsJVVmpUc4VsOBri6c53GsWRVj+IqYMLsWvr6jvGdAHIWfTdOn AAXcQmAmflgC3vy2XOeirnDy53ScX6/9RTvMg=

Hi all,

I am planning to use the half edge data structure in my research,
especially for edge-to-face traversal and edge iteration about a
vertex, and I found that the representation and the operations are
readily implemented in CGAL and OpenMesh, e.g. via their respective
circulators. Anybody has done a comparison between the two? So far I
found that in a related paper
(http://www.graphics.rwth-aachen.de/uploads/media/openmesh.pdf),
OpenMesh boasts its efficient handling of dynamic structure, which
CGAL does not seem to accommodate, but this paper is quite old
(published in 2002). On the other hand, CGAL's polyhedron tutorial
(http://www.cgal.org/Tutorials/Polyhedron/tutorial.pdf) only mentions
that the √3-subdivision is faster in CGAL, but I do not need this
feature. Googling and digging up the archives do not really help.

I am better-acquainted to CGAL, so this is one advantage to me,
whereas I only recently know OpenMesh. Nevertheless, I will consider
the trade-off between the two libraries.

By the way, please correct me if I make any mistake here.

Thank you!

Best regards,
Nicholas Mario Wardhana



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page