Subject: CGAL users discussion list
List archive
- From: "Sebastien Loriot (GeometryFactory)" <>
- To:
- Subject: Re: [cgal-discuss] Re: Intersecting with Cartesian kerenl
- Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 15:56:49 +0100
On 03/02/2012 03:50 PM, Zohar wrote:
1. Why is the Simple_Cartesian better than the Cartesian?
I found in the doc of simple_cart:
"In contrast to Cartesian, no reference counting is used internally. This
eases debugging, but may slow down algorithms that copy objects
intensively."
It's not better or worse, it's different. It depends on the application.
Sebastien.
2. That's a good idea to first test the intersection using a predicate, and
only then find the type of intersection using an exact intersection. I
didn't realize up until now the difference between predicate and
construction .
--
View this message in context:
http://cgal-discuss.949826.n4.nabble.com/Intersecting-with-Cartesian-kerenl-tp4425392p4438680.html
Sent from the cgal-discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
- [cgal-discuss] Re: Intersecting with Cartesian kerenl, Zohar, 03/02/2012
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Re: Intersecting with Cartesian kerenl, Sebastien Loriot (GeometryFactory), 03/02/2012
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Re: Intersecting with Cartesian kerenl, Marc Glisse, 03/02/2012
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Re: Intersecting with Cartesian kerenl, Stefan Schirra, 03/02/2012
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Re: Intersecting with Cartesian kerenl, Philipp Moeller, 03/02/2012
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Re: Intersecting with Cartesian kerenl, Marc Glisse, 03/02/2012
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Re: Intersecting with Cartesian kerenl, Stefan Schirra, 03/02/2012
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.