Subject: CGAL users discussion list
List archive
- From: Monique Teillaud <>
- To:
- Subject: Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3
- Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 10:40:35 +0200
Le 24/11/11 10:29, Juan Carlos Lopez Alfonso a écrit :
Please, if you can improve the simulations in some way, please let me know!!!
You should try Olivier's suggestion. I copy-paste it:
-----------------
Concerning the degeneracies, if your points are in parallel (say horizontal)
planes but are not degenerated in one plane
(no cocircular points) you may also improve the efficiency by inserting
first one point above the highest plane and one point below the lowest plane
to avoid many coplanar faces on the convex hull.
If you really need it, you can remove these two points at the end
(it will be costly but I guess that you still be faster that without these two dummy points).
-----------------
How I said, I always run my simulations in Release Mode and I use the
insert function (dt.insert(begin, end)).
good
also, which kernel are you using?
My question is about the
computing time: Can I say something about this if I dont have any
problem with memory (I will use a very powerful computer)?
Without a crystal ball, it is hard to know running times in advance...
Even when my
set of points are 'degenerate' (in parallel planes), Can I always expect
a result of Delaunay triangulations?
yes!
--
Monique Teillaud
INRIA Sophia Antipolis - Méditerranée
http://www.inria.fr/sophia/members/Monique.Teillaud/
- [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Juan Carlos Lopez Alfonso, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Monique Teillaud, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Juan Carlos Lopez Alfonso, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Olivier Devillers, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Juan Carlos Lopez Alfonso, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Andreas Fabri, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Monique Teillaud, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Juan Carlos Lopez Alfonso, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Monique Teillaud, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Olivier Devillers, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Daniel Duque, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Louis Lavery, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Daniel Duque, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Andreas Fabri, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Daniel Duque, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Louis Lavery, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Daniel Duque, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Monique Teillaud, 11/24/2011
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.